New Delhi:
High Court directed Delhi Police to file a status report on the proposed law to deal with snatching incidents. Direction came on a petition seeking new law on the line of Haryana and Maharashtra to deal with the menace of snatching.
A PIL was filed in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court addressing the growing menace of snatching subjecting the citizens and even foreign tourists which ensues series of other serious offences including crime against woman, molestation, attempt to murder and even deaths of the victim using dangerous weapons.
The court was apprised as to how the offence of snatching has almost become endemic, however Delhi Police with a view to burke and minimise the crime rate is either discouraging the victims to refrain from lodging the FIRs or Registering FIRs under trivial section such as 379 and 356 even when hurt is caused instead of Section 392 and 397. Further, the enactment of new laws in Haryana have constrained such criminals to shift base in Delhi.
The Hon’ble Chief Justice acknowledged that issue of snatching is a serious offence as it take in its fold other serious offences like deaths of victim, attempt to murder, grievous hurt as such incidents were incorporated in the petition too and specifically asked as to (i) Why can’t it be treated as an organised crime?(ii) Why can’t the law in Delhi be brought in lines with Haryana and Maharashtra?
Why the offenders are booked only under Section 379 and 356 IPC and not 392 and 397 even when hurt is caused during the course of committing robbery.
The court took note of the fact that the offences of snatching has increased by 413% in the last Five years. The court carefully examined 392 and 397 of the Indian Penal code raising concern over trivialisation of matter.
On the objection of the counsel for the Central Govt that the Courts cannot frame law ,the Delhi High Court repelling the contentions of the Counsel gave them 10 days time to come up with an explanation in the form of status report as to why in Delhi stringent laws in lines of Haryana and Maharashtra cannot be enacted?
It was also apprised to the Court that majority of Public spaces and public parks are bereft of basic securities, lack of vigil,cctv cameras and lightings.Specifically qua public parks prayer was made to beef up security in public parks which act as a safe haven for such criminals and drug addicts.
