On Wednesday, Bombay High Court was the December 2024 decree of the Maharashtra State Commission (MSHRC), which was headed by the Mumbai Police Commissioner (CP) and a 10-year-old jeweler was arrested by police officers.
Three officials in the south of “Azad Maidan” police station Mumbai He allegedly extorted 25,000 rubles from the jeweler, threatening him involves him with a false case.
Medical Mohit-der and Nela Kokhale took over the current mediation petition by Mumbai CP Vivek Phanlhe.
According to the lawsuit Nishant Jain (33), the jewelry store is in South Mumbai, the officials in the mentioned police station go to the store, 2024. On March 1, in connection with the case with a stolen bracelet, which was obtained.
The plaintiff claimed that the handcuff was pledged by his owner by his owner and showed the transaction entrances.
However, police officers allegedly asked him to visit Azad Maidan department and arrested him and threatened to initiate a criminal case, demanding 50,000 AMD. Jen claimed that he was allowed to leave the police station only after he paid 25,000 Rs.
During the mental and physical torture of the police, he complained to high-ranking police officers and MSHRC. He was initiated in a departmental issue, and three police officials were punished “Cause of two-year growth.”
History continues under this ad
In 2024, in 2024. The panel also asked Mumbai CP to guide the stakeholder of the police under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) section under the BNATIYA NYAY SANHITA (BNS).
Quoting “The Alarms of such incidents in the police station”, the Human Rights Commission offered to regularly conduct seminars “Police Forces to Combining the State Force” and focusing on the casualties and victims of those who defend themselves.
Senior Lawyer Shirish and lawyer Ramay and DCP Zone, Senior CP and DCP Zone, say that the order of MSHRC is “inspired illegal”, and the same should be stopped and aside.
The statement said that MSHRC, meanwhile, should not take into account that every case of the police investigation may not be considered human rights, “it should be taken into account that higher bodies have been taken.
History continues under this ad
Plain added that as interested in the authorities. He also said that the commission was unable to give a lawyer who represents the Mumbai CP to argue his case.
Responding to the fact that the police did not take criminal cases against officials against the crime, Gupte said that the case has taken the case with an anti-corruption bureau (ACB). The eyeball also touched upon the establishment of HC decisions that remained MSHRC’s commands that ruled the police to pay compensation.
The lawyer of the state government took the time to answer the lawsuit, HC posted the case on June 10 and asked lawyer General Birendra Sarafi to support that date. It noted.
The Prime Minister’s lawyer took time to answer the lawsuit, HC posted the case on June 10 and looked for aid for lawyer General Birendra Saraf.
