Maimed and mauled GT journalist Simon Alfonso is being treated
at GMC after the physical attack on him allegedly by the Chicalim
Sarpanch Raul D'Costa on Wednesday. Though his condition is not
alarming, it is serious as doctors have diagnosed suspected
fracture in the spinal cord without any neuro-vascular deficit.
Simon who was admitted at the Trauma ward late in the evening on
Wednesday was on Friday afternoon shifted to ward no 104. He is at the
moment undergoing treatment at GMC and will be out of action for
atleast six weeks.
Talking to this reporter from the hospital, Simon said, "My fault was
that I raised my voice against injustice and supported the villagers
in their fight. Is it wrong for a law abiding citizen to raise their
voice against injustice? Is the Sarpanch, who is supposed to protect
his village and its people, justified in hitting me and causing
injuries to me?"
According to Simon, he along with villagers were fighting against the
Pinky Shipyard's mega project in Chicalim. "We were coming to Panjim.
On the way we met Milan Borman at the panchayat premise. I got into a
heated argument with him. I didn't realise when the Sarpanch
approached me and started punching my face, which left me in shock and
pain", he said.
"It was unprovoked attack by the Sarpanch", he added.
When contacted, Dr Rajan Kunkolienkar, Medical Superintendent, GMC
said, "He is undergoing treatment at GMC and his condition is stable."
Thursday, November 02, 2006
Police, Sub Divisional Magistrate ought to know more about Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act
PANJIM: This is one major goof-up that ought to embarrass the protectors of law. The police wrongfully book three women, allegedly working for Anthony Britto, for procuring girls into commercial sex trade and then producing them before the Sub-divisional magistrate (SDM), Margao instead of a special magistrate. And the SDM remands the perpetrators to the State Protective Home, where rescued trafficked victims are rehabilitated.
Interestingly, this goof-up is happening despite innumerable training sessions conducted by NGOs working with trafficked victims to acquaint the protectors of the law with The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITPA).
Check out how the case was goofed up:
ERROR 1
COMMITTED BY: The Margao Police
WHAT HAPPENED: The Margao police got information that three of Anthony’s women were coming from Mumbai. So they posed as customers at the station and arrested the women - Laxmi, Kajal and Arti-- from the railway station.
WHERE THEY WENT WRONG:
* They registered an offence under Section 4 and 5 of ITPA and produced the girls before the SDM, Margao. Incidentally, those who are arrested under these sections have to be produced before judicial magistrate of the first class and not SDM.
ERROR 2
COMMITTED BY: SDM, Margao
WHAT HAPPENED: The SDM remanded the three women by an order dated September 6, 2006 to Protective Home, Merces. Here the women were kept for nearly one and half months.
WHERE HE WENT WRONG:
* The case booked under section 4 and 5 doesn’t fall within the jurisdiction of SDM. Yet the SDM remanded the three women to Protective Home, though they are perpetrators of the crime (under section 4 and 5) and not victims.
* A SDM can remand the girl to Protective Home if they are brought under section 15 and 16 ITPA. Then the girls can be referred to Protective Home under section 17 of ITPA.
THE END RESULT
In an order (case No SDM/SAL/Prot-Home/2006/8104) passed by the court of SDM Dipak Desai, Margao (a copy of which is in possession with GT), the SDM released the women stating, “The SDPO (Margao) failed to give any details. Therefore, I have no option but to release them as there is no point of keeping them in Protective Home without proper justification”.
The order further said that SDPO has failed to submit his report and failed to submit the details of the case or offence registered against the women. “As per my knowledge all the above ladies are major in age and they were not arrested or taken into custody from the brothel, however they were arrested by the Police at the Railway station,” the order added.
Interestingly, this goof-up is happening despite innumerable training sessions conducted by NGOs working with trafficked victims to acquaint the protectors of the law with The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITPA).
Check out how the case was goofed up:
ERROR 1
COMMITTED BY: The Margao Police
WHAT HAPPENED: The Margao police got information that three of Anthony’s women were coming from Mumbai. So they posed as customers at the station and arrested the women - Laxmi, Kajal and Arti-- from the railway station.
WHERE THEY WENT WRONG:
* They registered an offence under Section 4 and 5 of ITPA and produced the girls before the SDM, Margao. Incidentally, those who are arrested under these sections have to be produced before judicial magistrate of the first class and not SDM.
ERROR 2
COMMITTED BY: SDM, Margao
WHAT HAPPENED: The SDM remanded the three women by an order dated September 6, 2006 to Protective Home, Merces. Here the women were kept for nearly one and half months.
WHERE HE WENT WRONG:
* The case booked under section 4 and 5 doesn’t fall within the jurisdiction of SDM. Yet the SDM remanded the three women to Protective Home, though they are perpetrators of the crime (under section 4 and 5) and not victims.
* A SDM can remand the girl to Protective Home if they are brought under section 15 and 16 ITPA. Then the girls can be referred to Protective Home under section 17 of ITPA.
THE END RESULT
In an order (case No SDM/SAL/Prot-Home/2006/8104) passed by the court of SDM Dipak Desai, Margao (a copy of which is in possession with GT), the SDM released the women stating, “The SDPO (Margao) failed to give any details. Therefore, I have no option but to release them as there is no point of keeping them in Protective Home without proper justification”.
The order further said that SDPO has failed to submit his report and failed to submit the details of the case or offence registered against the women. “As per my knowledge all the above ladies are major in age and they were not arrested or taken into custody from the brothel, however they were arrested by the Police at the Railway station,” the order added.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)