The Chandigarh Police is facing serious allegations of failing to upload First Information Reports (FIRs) on its official website within the mandated 24-hour timeframe, directly violating both its own standard operating procedures and a landmark Supreme Court judgment.
Legal Group Exposes Compliance Failure
Lawyers for Human Rights International (LFHRI) has formally written to Chandigarh's top police officials, including the Director General of Police (DGP) and Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), highlighting what it calls a clear case of non-compliance. The legal rights organization pointed to specific binding directives that require prompt public disclosure of FIRs.
In a detailed letter dated November 19, advocate N Aggarwal, who serves as general secretary of LFHRI's Chandigarh unit, emphasized that FIRs not categorized as sensitive must be uploaded on the Chandigarh Police website within 24 hours of registration. This requirement is clearly outlined in SOP 53 of 2013, the police department's own operational guideline.
Supreme Court Mandate Being Ignored
The legal basis for this requirement extends beyond internal police procedures. LFHRI's communication specifically cited the Supreme Court's 2016 ruling in Youth Bar Association of India versus Union of India (Case: (2016) 9 SCC 473). This landmark judgment mandates all state police forces across India to upload copies of non-sensitive FIRs within 24 hours of registration.
The Supreme Court did provide limited flexibility in its ruling, allowing for an extension to 48 or 72 hours only in exceptional circumstances where internet connectivity issues prevent timely uploading. However, LFHRI's investigation found that several recently registered FIRs in Chandigarh had not been uploaded even after these extended permissible periods had elapsed.
Specific Cases of Non-Compliance Identified
The rights organization didn't just make general allegations but provided specific evidence of the violation. The letter explicitly identified four FIRs that remain missing from the public domain despite the mandatory uploading period having passed:
- FIR No. 23 dated November 7
- FIR No. 176 dated November 8
- FIR No. 124 dated October 18
- FIR No. 126 dated October 20
Advocate Aggarwal characterized this delay as a serious violation of binding directions that undermines police transparency and accountability. He warned that such practices deprive accused individuals, victims, and the general public of timely access to crucial information about legal proceedings.
Police Response and Corrective Measures Sought
Seeking immediate corrective action, LFHRI has urged the police leadership to issue clear instructions to all police stations under their jurisdiction. The organization demanded strict adherence to both SOP 53 of 2013 and the Supreme Court's ruling, and requested that the action taken in response to their letter be formally communicated back to them.
When approached for comment, IGP Pushpendra Kumar stated that he had not yet reviewed the communication sent by LFHRI but assured that appropriate action would be taken according to established legal procedures once the application is formally received and processed.
The ongoing situation raises significant questions about transparency in police functioning and the implementation of judicial directives meant to ensure accountability in India's law enforcement system.
