The FIR is an important Document that is needed for any case.
FIR
Slightest mistake can prove costly.
This has to be filed in the Police Station under whose jurisdiction the area of Crime falls.
If the Policeman a Police Station refuse to file case citing jurisdiction problems , file it with the Commissioner’s Office wherever it is available or file Online.
It must be filed immediately. Cause for delay may be mentioned, if there is any.
2. If given orally, it MUST be taken down in writing and explained to you by the officer in charge, at a Police Station within the jurisdiction of which the offence has taken place.
3. There should be four copies recorded simultaneously, with carbon sheets in place.
4. Recorded in the first person.It may be filed in English or in your Regional Language.
5. Avoid complicated, technical words, terminologies , unnecessary details and more importantly do not offer your views.
6.No overwriting or coring out.
7. Ensure that the arrival/departure time is mentioned in the FIR and in the Daily Diary Register at the Police Station
8. It must contain authentic information, including these necessary bits of information:
– What information do you want to convey?
– In what capacity are you providing the information?
– Who is the perpetrator of the crime?
– Who has the crime been committed against – victim /complainant?
– When was it committed (time)?
– Where was it committed (specific place /locality/area)?
– Why do you think it was committed?
– Which way (actual process involved) was it committed?
– Were there any witnesses? (Names will be required here.)
– What were the losses? (Money /valuables/ possessions /physical damage etc.)
– What were the traces at the scene of the crime? (Weapons/evidence if any.)
9. After completion, you MUST carefully read the document and sign it.
10. It must be recorded by the officer in the book maintained for this purpose by the State Government.
11. You have the right to and must get a copy of it for your records. You are not required to pay for the same.
12. You are not required by law to give an affidavit.
Obtain a copy the FIR and remember the FIR Number.
Scan the copy and keep it in GDrive or in any form in your computer for safety.
Ensure that you have a witness while you fill out the FIR.
The earlier someone with schizophrenia is diagnosed and stabilized on treatment, the better the long-term prognosis for their illness
Teen suicide is a growing problem — and teens with schizophrenia have approximately a 50% risk of attempted suicide
In rare instances, children as young as five can develop schizophrenia.
Anti-psychotic medications are the generally recommended treatment for schizophrenia. If medication for schizophrenia is discontinued, the relapse rate is about 80 percent within 2 years. With continued drug treatment, only about 40 percent of recovered patients will suffer relapses.( Source: NIMH)
Wide variation occurs in the course of schizophrenia. Some people have psychotic episodes of illness lasting weeks or months with full remission of their symptoms between each episode; others have a fluctuating course in which symptoms are continuous but rise and fall in intensity; others have relatively little variation in the symptoms of their illness over time. At one end of the spectrum, the person has a single psychotic episode of schizophrenia followed by complete recovery; at the other end of the spectrum is a course in which the illness never abates and debilitating effects increase. (source: Openthedoors). Recent research increasingly shows that the disease process of schizophrenia gradually and significantly damages the brain of the person, and that earlier treatments (medications and other therapies) seem to result in less damage over time.
Therefore, the approximate number of people in the United States suffering from:
Early intervention and early use of new medications lead to better medical outcomes for the individual
The earlier someone with schizophrenia is diagnosed and stabilized on treatment, the better the long-term prognosis for their illness
Teen suicide is a growing problem — and teens with schizophrenia have approximately a 50% risk of attempted suicide
In rare instances, children as young as five can develop schizophrenia.
Anti-psychotic medications are the generally recommended treatment for schizophrenia. If medication for schizophrenia is discontinued, the relapse rate is about 80 percent within 2 years. With continued drug treatment, only about 40 percent of recovered patients will suffer relapses.( Source: NIMH)
Wide variation occurs in the course of schizophrenia. Some people have psychotic episodes of illness lasting weeks or months with full remission of their symptoms between each episode; others have a fluctuating course in which symptoms are continuous but rise and fall in intensity; others have relatively little variation in the symptoms of their illness over time. At one end of the spectrum, the person has a single psychotic episode of schizophrenia followed by complete recovery; at the other end of the spectrum is a course in which the illness never abates and debilitating effects increase. (source: Openthedoors). Recent research increasingly shows that the disease process of schizophrenia gradually and significantly damages the brain of the person, and that earlier treatments (medications and other therapies) seem to result in less damage over time (source: UCLA NeuroImaging Lab , Other info – see “Early Treatment” section of this page).
India has been reluctant to take on Sri Lanka on the genocide issue.
Tamil Kills India Involved?
The reason touted is the geopolitical considerations, implying that China might get a foot hold in Sri Lanka.
Creation of Tamil Elam might result in Greater Tamil Elam facilitating the secession of Tamil Nadu from India.
The third, in my view is the anger at the Tamils for the killing of Rajiv Gandhi.
All the political parties played the Tamil Card, for vote politics in Tamil Nadu, by alternately supporting and withdrawing support to the LTTE.
On the one hand, India will train LTTE, allow LTTE Chief Prabhakaran to stay in India excaping from Sri Lankan Authorities,
MGR will donate publicly to Prabhakaran and when Centre raised its eyebrows started condemning the Terrorists.
Karunanidhi can outclassed all, by speaking in all voices at the same time, for and against LTTE, for and against Tamil Elam!
Relatively Jayalalithaa is consistent in terming LTTE as Terrorists and wanted them banned in India and whenever she was/in power terrorist activities will wane.
Now onto India’s complicity.
Indi has contributed immensely by way of Intelligence to Sri Lanka in the final stages of the last war.
In fact India knew of the massacre.
PPT speaks of UK and US in being silent spectators, India has been said to be involved in the Killing of the tamils and India’s Role will be probed.
“While the judges held the USA and the UK to be complicit in the genocidal process, they were of the opinion that more evidence was needed as regards India’s role.”
Terming India its “closest ally”, Sri Lanka has said its support during the war with the LTTE helped “reduce the pressure” mounted by the world community and allowed it to proceed with humanitarian operations in the war-ravaged north unhindered.
“The relationship developed over the past four years with our closest ally, India helped us in many ways in our war against terrorism,” the powerful Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa said.
India’s support greatly helped “reduce the pressure mounted by other nations,” which allowed us to proceed with our humanitarian operations unhindered, Rajapaksa the brother of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa said in Colombo on Sunday in Colombo.
“It is very important that we strengthen this key relationship even further in the years to come,” he said while speaking at a function in Colombo.
Persuading western countries that they must help Sri Lanka more meaningfully to combat this threat requires us to unite as a nation and speak with one voice, instead of being weakened and divided by petty considerations, he said.
He said significant support was also received from other key allies that helped withstand the pressure being “directed by the international community to leave the war unfinished.”
“These countries also provided us vital material assistance towards the war effort, when barriers were put in place that prevented our obtaining military hardware from our western allies,” Rajapaksa said in his address.
He said even though the Tiger rebels will not be able to resurface in Sri Lanka, their financial network was a matter of concern.”
3.2 Eelam War IV
The so‐called Fourth Eelam War resulted from a gradual breakdown of the 2002 ceasefire.
Specifically, in April 2003 the LTTE announced its unilateral withdrawal from peace negotia‐
tions after it was excluded from a preparatory meeting of a donor conference taking place in
the U.S., where the LTTE was categorized as a terrorist organization.4 At least formally, the
ceasefire survived for nearly five more years, but in 2004 an undeclared war between LTTE
and government forces flared up again (HRW 2005). By July 2006, the ceasefire had de facto
collapsed.
At the same time, the election of Mahinda Rajapaksa as Sri Lanka’s executive president in
November 2005 in a coalition with hard‐line Sinhalese parties constituted the precondition
for a much tougher stance against the LTTE. Rajapaksa strengthened Sri Lanka’s military ca‐
pabilities and established a “highly personalized, authoritarian regime, in which extreme na‐
tionalist views [were] widely accepted” (ICG 2007: 21). Not only the LTTE displayed a will‐
ingness to provoke the government and to resume the war, but also the government seemed
to be keen on a “fight to the finish” (Reddy 2006): “[w]hat was new in the Rajapaksa admini‐
stration’s approach was the goal of defeating, as opposed to weakening, the LTTE militarily
and then making the LTTE irrelevant to any political solution to the ethnic conflict” (Uyan‐
goda 2009).
3 At the same time, India refused to take part in multilateral initiatives regarding Sri Lanka, for example in donor
conferences. As one interviewee put it, “at the donor conferences India was present as an observer but it would
not join a multilateral agreement in its own region!” Interview with expert, New Delhi, November 25, 2008.
4 See “Exclusion from donors conference undermines peace process”, TamilNet, April 4, 2003, at:
net.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=8673> (May 25, 2009). Destradi: India and the Civil Warin Sri Lanka: On the Failures ofRegional Conflict Management in SouthAsia 11
In an unprecedented military offensive, Sri Lankan government forces gradually re‐con‐
quered the territories under LTTE control—the East in 2007 and, step by step, also the North‐
ern province. When the Sri Lankan military crossed the border of the Kilinochchi district, the
displacement of a huge number of civilians—estimated to be as high as 200,000—began
(Fuller 2009). On January 2, 2009, the city of Kilinochchi, which had been the Tigers’ adminis‐
trative capital since 1995, fell into the hands of the government forces after a long siege.
Trapped between the advancing Sri Lankan armed forces and the retreating LTTE rebels, the
civilians were used by the LTTE as human shields and subjected to “intentional shelling” by
the government forces (ICG 2010: i). By mid‐January 2009, the LTTE had been confined to a
small jungle area in the Mullaithivu district, a space that continued to shrink up until the
LTTE’s military defeat and the death of its leadership in May 2009.
Not only was the final phase of the war characterized by massive violations of interna‐
tional humanitarian law on both sides,5 but according to UN estimates, as of May 22, 2009,
there were also at least 300,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Sri Lanka (UN 2009a).
The civilians who managed to escape from the conflict zone were subject to a “screening” by
the government, which feared that LTTE cadres might have mingled with the refugees. Ap‐
proximately 250,000 IDPs were put in militarily controlled refugee camps, to which interna‐
tional aid agencies were given only partial access. Even though many countries pressured
Colombo, they did not manage to induce a policy change on the part of the Sri Lankan gov‐
ernment. China and Japan, along with Russia and Vietnam, prevented the UN Security
Council from discussing the Sri Lankan issue, defined as an internal matter of Sri Lanka
(Nessman 2009). And even India, as is illustrated in the following sections, supported the Sri
Lankan government.
President Rajapaksa, strengthened by his military victory, quickly consolidated his power
position by winning the presidential election of January 2010 and, with his party, the general
election of April 2010. Rajapaksa repeatedly refused an international investigation of war
crimes and human rights violations, as he argued they impinged on Sri Lanka’s sovereignty
(ICG 2010: 31). The Sri Lankan regime, in the meantime, has been assuming increasingly au‐
thoritarian traits, exemplified by the power concentrated in Rajapaksa’s family’s hands, an
almost total lack of press freedom (Schlütter 2010: 1), about 10,000 Sri Lankan citizens being
held for over a year for assumed involvement in LTTE activities (ICG 2010: 31), an increasingly
militarized governance culture (Senanayake 2009: 824), and no signs of willingness to find a
political situation providing for a meaningful devolution of power to the Tamil minority.
The Permanent People’s Tribunal , an international body has indicted Sri Lanka as Guilty of war crimes in killing the Tamils, under the guise of ending Terrorism in the Island Nation.
Channel 4 exposed the gruesome killing of innocent Tamilians point-blank, children and women included.
Recently David Cameron, PM, UK, met with the survivors of the Genocide when he attended the CHOGM Summit in Colombo.
“After an assessment of evidences presented by eyewitnesses and experts, judges of the Permanent People’s Tribunal reached unanimous consensus that the Sri Lankan state was guilty of crimes of genocide against the Eezham Tamils and that the genocide is continuing even after the end of the military operations against the LTTE. Concluding the four day session with a press conference at Bremen on Tuesday, the judges also noted that the Sri Lankan military did not have capacity to commit genocide on its own and that it was supported by the UK-USA-India axis. While the judges held the USA and the UK to be complicit in the genocidal process, they were of the opinion that more evidence was needed as regards India’s role.”
The PPT Report on Tamils Killing by Sri Lanka.
”
The Second Session of the Peoples’ Tribunal on Sri Lanka concluded today in Bremen, Germany, with
the presentation of its verdict. The panel of eleven judges unanimously found Sri Lanka guilty of the
crime of genocide against the Eelam Tamil people, and that this crime continues today.
The Tribunal specified that the victims are in this case the Eelam Tamils as a national group.
The Tribunal found that genocide against the Eelam Tamil group has not yet achieved the total
destruction of their identity. The genocidal coordinated plan of actions reached its climax on May 2009,
but it is clear that the Sri Lanka Government project to erase the Eelam Tamil identity, corroborated by
the above mentioned conduct, shows that genocide is a process and that process is ongoing. The
genocidal strategy changed once the perpetrators gained control of the territory. The killings are being
transformed into other forms of conduct, but the intention to destroy the group and its identity remains
and continues, through causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the Eelam Tamil group…
The Tribunal considers that the proofs established, beyond any reasonable doubt that the following acts
were committed by the Government of Sri Lanka
(a) Killing members of the group, which includes massacres, indiscriminate shelling, the strategy of
herding civilians into so‐called “No Fire Zones” for the purpose of massive killings, targeted assassinations
of outspoken Eelam Tamil civil leaders who were capable of articulating the Sri Lankan genocide project
to the outside world
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, including
acts of torture, inhumane or degrading treatment, sexual violence including rape, interrogations
combined with beatings, threats of death, and harm that damages health or causes disfigurement
or injury.
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction
in whole or in part, including
* expulsions of the victims from their homes, * seizures of private lands, * declaring vast areas as military
High Security Zone (HSZ) to facilitate the military acquisition of Tamil land
Further, the Tribunal considered evidence related to
(d) Imposingmeasuresintended to prevent births within the group
including forced sterilization and coerced contraception of Eelam Tamil women. Further investigation is
required on the extent of this practice in other regions before a determination is made on whether these
could be considered genocidal acts.
The UK and USA were found to be guilty of complicity in the crime of genocide, including
‐‐ complicity by procuring means, such as weapons, instruments or any other means, used to commit
genocide, with the accomplice knowing that such means would be used for such a purpose;
‐‐ complicity by knowingly aiding or abetting a perpetrator of a genocide in the planning or enabling acts
thereof;
Recognizing that the Sri Lankan state alone did not have the capacity to achieve their genocidal
ambitions, and given the evidence presented, the Tribunal believes that the UK, the USA and India are
guilty of complicity in genocide. However, given time constraints the Tribunal decided to withhold its
decision pending the consideration of additional evidence as to the possibility that India, as well as other
States, are indeed guilty of complicity in the crime of genocide against the Eelam Tamils.
More than 30 direct eye‐witnesses and experts testified in support of the Prosecution’s case, providing
evidence on various alleged crimes that could be determined to constitute the crime of genocide, as well
as on the legal and historical background and the charges of complicity.
This behaviour is not restricted to the poorer sections alone.
Affluent sections also resort to this, dumping parents in old age Homes , verbal abuse and refuse to maintain them.
I have a few posts on this under Lifestyle/India.
The population of the Senior citizens has been increasing over the years.
The Projected Population aged 60+ by sex as on 1st March 2001-2026, as per the Report of the Technical Group on Population Projections constituted by the National Commission on Population, May 2006 published by the Office of the Registrar General, India is as under:
(In million)
Year
Males
Females
Persons
2001
34.94
35.75
70.69
2006
40.75
42.83
83.58
2011
48.14
50.33
98.47
2016
58.11
59.99
118.10
2021
70.60
72.65
143.24
2026
84.62
88.56
173.18
What are the main features of elderly population of India?
Ans. The profile of the elderly population indicates that:
a majority of them are in rural areas;
feminization of the elderly population; and
increase in the number of older-old (persons above 80 years) and
a large percentage (30%) of the elderly are below the poverty line.
What is the share of the older persons in the total population of the Country?
Ans. The percentage share of the projected population aged 60+ in the total projected population by sex on 1st March 2001-2026, India, is as under:
Year
Males
Females
Persons
2001
6.60
7.10
6.90
2006
7.10
8.00
7.50
2011
7.70
8.70
8.30
2016
8.70
9.80
9.30
2021
10.20
11.30
10.70
2026
11.80
13.10
12.40
Following are the procedures and FAQs on the subject.
The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents under Senior Citizens Act 2007.
he Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007
What are the important features of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007?
Ans. The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 envisages providing need-based maintenance to the parents/grand parents from their children. Tribunals will be set up for the purpose of settling the maintenance claims of the parents in a time bound manner. Lawyers are barred from participating in the proceedings of the Tribunals at any stage.
The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 also contains enabling provisions like protection of life and property of senior citizens, better medical facilities, setting up of old age homes in every district, etc.
What is the applicability of the Act?
Ans. The Act extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir and it applies also to citizens of India outside India (Section 1(2))
Ans. The Act come into force in a State on such date as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint (Section 1(3)).
What is the definition of Child/children under the Act?
Ans. The Act defines “children” as son, daughter, grandson and granddaughter who are not minor.
What is the definition of Maintenance under the Act?
Ans. The “Maintenance” includes provision for food, clothing, residence and medical attendance and treatment;
What is the definition of a Senior Citizen under the Act?
Ans. A “senior citizen” means any person being a citizen of India, who has attained the age of sixty years or above;
Who are eligible for claiming maintenance under the provisions of the Act?
Ans. The Act provides that a senior citizen including parent who is unable to maintain himself from his own earning or out of the property owned by him, shall be entitled to make an application for claiming maintenance.
Whether a person other the claimant can file application on his/her behalf?
Ans. An application for maintenance may be made
by a senior citizen or a parent, as the case may be; or
if he is incapable, by any other person or organization authorized by him; or
the Tribunal may take cognizance suo motu.
Whether there is any provision for the Tribunal to order subsistence allowance to the claimant during the proceedings?
Ans. The Tribunal may, during the pendency of the proceeding regarding monthly allowance for the maintenance under this section, order such children or relative to make a monthly allowance for the interim maintenance of such senior citizen including parent and to pay the same to such senior citizen including parent as the Tribunal may from time to time direct.
What is the time limit for disposing an application for claiming maintenance?
Ans. An application filed under sub-section (2) for the monthly allowance for the maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be disposed of within ninety days from the date of the service of notice of the application to such person. However, the Tribunal may extend the said period, once for a maximum period of thirty days in exceptional circumstances for reasons to be recorded in writing.
What is the monitoring mechanism for implementation of the Act by the States?
Ans. The Act has been enacted in pursuance of the provisions of Article 41 read with Entry 23 of the Concurrent List (Schedule VII) of the Constitution of India. State Governments are required to notify the Act and frame Rules for implementing the provisions of the Act.
However, Section 30 of the Act enables the Central Government to give directions to State Governments for carrying into execution of the provisions of the Act. Further, Section 31 of the Act provides for periodic review and monitoring of the progress of implementation of the Act by the State Governments. The Ministry will act in accordance with these provisions to ensure effective implementation of the provisions of the Act by the States.
Has any timeframe has been prescribed for setting up of Tribunals by the States?
Ans. The State Government are required to constitute for each Subdivision one or more Tribunals as per the need within a period of six months from the date of the commencement of this Act.
What is the effect of the order of maintenance?
Ans. A maintenance order made under this Act shall have the same force and effect as an order passed under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and shall be executed in the manner prescribed for the execution of such order by that Code.
Who can appeal to the appellate Authority under the Act?
Ans. Any senior citizen or a parent, as the case may be, aggrieved by an order of a Tribunal may, within sixty days from the date of the order, prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal:
That is the time limit for an appellate authority to dispose of the appeal?
Ans. The Appellate Tribunal is required to make endeavours to pronounce its order in writing within one month of the receipt of an appeal.
Is there any penal provision for enforcement of maintenance order of the Tribunal?
Ans. Yes, the Maintenance Order given by the Tribunal will have the same effect as the maintenance order passed under Section 125 of Cr. PC. This will include imprisonment upto One month and issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines.
What are the provisions about revocation of will?
Ans. As per the provision of Act, a senior citizen can seek to revoke any property, which has been transferred in favour of children/relative on the condition that such children/relative would provide maintenance to him but are not providing the same. The tribunals are empowered to declare such transfers as void on the applications of such parent.
Is any penalty/imprisonment is for the children who abandon their parents?
Ans. Yes, the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 contains penal provisions to discourage abandonment of parents by their children by imprisonment for a term of 3 months and a fine upto Rs. 5000/- or both on the children.
You must be logged in to post a comment.