NHRC seeks ATR on plight of Odisha villages in mineral-rich hinterlands
The NHRC sought the ATR while taking cognisance of the petition filed by human rights lawyer Radhakanta Tripathy.
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday sought an action taken report (ATR) from the West Bengal government on the indiscriminate use of red and blue beacons atop cars in the state.
The division bench of Chief Justice Prakash Srivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj sought a report from the state government on how many cases have been filed for violating the beacon rules under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that relates to punishment for cheating by personation.
The state government has been asked to place the report in front of the bench by November 28.
Advertisement
“Use of red and blue beacons is rampant in the state. Use of such beacons are visible everywhere. Are all these vehicles eligible for using beacons? The state is supposed to act under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code for illegal use of red and blue beacons. The court would like to know how many cases the state government has filed on this count,” Chief Justice Srivastava said.
The matter is related to the use of a red beacon on the vehicle of Trinamool Congress strongman and its Birbhum district president Anubrata Mondal, who is presently in judicial custody for his alleged involvement in the multi-crore cattle smuggling scam.
A PIL was earlier filed in the Calcutta High Court wherein the petitioner had questioned as to how can a party’s district president use a red beacon-fitted car when even the elected MLAs and MPs are not allowed to do so.
On Tuesday, the state government submitted a report on this count to the division bench, bu the latter expressed dissatisfaction over the incomplete nature of the report.
In its report, the state government said that it has already issued a notification mentioning who can use beacons on their vehicles and who are eligible for which beacon.
However, the report remained vague on the action taken against Anubrata Mondal for violating the beacon norm, which displeased the judges.
Advertisement
