Arbitrary summoning to husband of Mahima Maurya by Vindhyachal police is not justified

Grievance Status for registration number : GOVUP/E/2024/0076793

Grievance Concerns To

Name Of Complainant

Mahima Maurya

Date of Receipt

26/10/2024

Received By Ministry/Department

Uttar Pradesh

Grievance Description

Enquiry under Article 51 A of the constitution of India regarding the summoning of the husband by the Vindhyachal police.

The government must not suppress the voice of the women cryptically as rights of women granted in the constitution of India as well as in the universal declaration of human rights are violated if government uses police force tyrannically. Arbitrariness and tyranny cannot be integral part of good governance.

The right to reason is the indispensable part of sound judicial system quoted in various judgements by the apex court of India as well as high court of judicature at Allahabad and they also articulated and mentioned in judgements that right to reason must also be applied in the administrative setup of the government to provide the better governance to the people in the state.

Therefore Vindhyachal police must provide the reason to summon the husband of the applicant in police Kotwali Vindhyachal today?

Case status-The applicant was mercilessly beaten and no first information report has been registered by the Vindhyachal police in the matter.

Yesterday Sub inspector Vinod Kumar Yadav visited the village of Godsar Sarpati and summoned the husband of the applicant Mr Pramod Kumar Maurya and asked him to come to Vindhyachal police station today.

Sub inspector mister Vinod Kumar Yadav of Vindhyachal police Kotwali did not reveal any reason to the husband of the applicant regarding the summon made oral to the husband.

Transparency and accountability is the integral part of the healthy governance so it is an obligatory duty of the concerned police staff to tell the reason to the applicant why the husband of the applicant was summoned in the police station Vindhyachal by the concerned police Sub inspector?

I do not think that the track record of the police is excellent especially Vindhyachal police which did not register the first information report of the applicant when the applicant was mercilessly beaten by the offenders and repeated representations submitted by the applicant online but no present approach adopted by the concerned police to close the grievances of the applicant.

The distance between the village of Godsar Sarpati and Vindhyachal police Kotwali is 25 km and my husband earns livelihood on a daily basis. Such indiscriminate decisions and arbitrary summoning will create the situation of hunger before the family of the applicant.

If they will summon the applicant in order to correct the blunder and register the first information report then that will be justified but to summon the husband of the applicant is grossly illegal.

Station house officer, Vindhyachal police Kotwali must take a glance of the following para of judgements generally quoted in various judgements when cryptic orders or reports submitted by the government bureaucrats before the court.

Even in respect of administrative orders Lord Denning, M.R. in Breen v. Amalgamated Engg. Union (1971) 1 All ER 1148, observed: "The giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration." In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree 1974 ICR 120 (NIRC) it was observed: "Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice." "Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision-taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at." Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons

Current Status

Under process   

Date of Action

26/10/2024

Officer Concerns To

Officer Name

Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary)

Organisation name

Uttar Pradesh

Contact Address

Chief Minister Secretariat , Room No. 321, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow

Email Address

arvind.12574@gov.in

Contact Number

05222226350