To,
The Superintendent of Police,
Aizawl District
Aizawl, Mizoram
Sir,
Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Laltanpuia Pachuau. I am from Zonuam, Aizawl but, currently, I live in Sydney, Australia.
I am writing this email to you because I would like to clarify and seek a proper response regarding a letter and photo I submitted to the Officer in Charge, Aizawl Police Station on June 4.
It is regarding the alleged violation of the Mizoram Liquor Total Prohibition Act by the Chief Minister Lalthanhawla and my request to the police to uphold the law and take necessary actions. I believe my request has not been addressed appropriately.
I am aware that the MLTP Act 1995, Chapter V-58a specifically declares "Every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable” and the Criminal Code of Procedure 1973, Section 154 mandates the officer in charge to register the first information report, thereby setting a criminal law into motion. I believe the issue of whether an officer is bound to register an FIR was settled by the Supreme Court of India in the "Lalita Kumari vrs Govt. of UP and others on 27th Feb 2012" (WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.68 OF 2008) when it concluded as quoted below-
" 111) In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold:
i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation. "
The infamous picture widely circulated on the internet shows the Chief Minister and his wife holding glasses. In the picuture, it appears that they are consuming or had consumed Foster's beer, a prohibited liquor containing alcohol under the MLTP Act. The picture shows cans of beer placed on the table in front of them. As this picture given to the police officer in charge contains information that discloses commission of a cognizable offence (as per the MLTP Act Chapter V-58a), my understanding of the Supreme Court's ruling on CrPC Sec154 is that it is mandatory for the police to register an FIR. However, no FIR has been registered.
On June 8, your predecessor, Mr.L.R.Dingliana Sailo spoke to Mr.H.C.Vanlalruata, Principal Correspondent, Press Trust of India and said "criminal case would not be registered as it would be impossible to prove that the chief minister and his wife, as alleged in the FIR and the accompanying photograph, were actually drinking beer. Such photographs can be doctored or edited on computer and it would be impossible to be used as evidence."
On June 27, I sent an email to the former SP requesting him to uphold the law by registering the FIR. I received a prompt reply on the same day under SP(A) Letter No. CB/Misc/2014/51 Dated Aizawl, the 27th June, 2014.
However, I was informed that my "complaint" sent by email could not be registered due to its apparent inadequacy to satisfy what the police believe is the requirement of Section 154 of the CrPC.
On July 9 when I contacted the then SP by phone, I was told that Section 154 of the CrPC required me to be present at the time of submission of the FIR and that cases involving liquor are rarely registered without "recovery" of materials (which I believe is not the requirement of the MLTP Act but rather a practice by the police.) Those were his clarifications for the June 27 email reply. I was also told that inquiry was still being conducted and based on what was known, the picture was probably digitally altered to appear the way it does. I was told that inquiries like these take time.
When I submitted the letter on June 4, my knowledge of the circumstance involving the picture was limited. However, I later learnt that the picture was taken on April 21 by an individual who has already been identified by the police. The place of occurence has also been confirmed. It is in Aizawl.
The reason for the non-registration of the FIR given on June 8 i.e, impossibility to prove violation of the law and conclusion of the picture as doctored, I believe, is not the job of the police to consider but rather the job of the court. I would also argue that the possibility of the picture being doctored cannot be used as a reason not to register a case.
On June 8, nothing about the picture's authenticity or otherwise had been confirmed. In fact, on July 9, I was told that the matter was still under investigation/inquiry which meant that the police had not confirmed whether the picture was doctored or not.
I believe it is in the best interest of the rule of law that the head of our State government is either cleared or convicted for the alleged offence as clearly shown in the picture I have attached.
It has been over a month since my letter was submitted at the Aizawl Police Station with no conclusion. It appears to be a deliberate delay or an incompetent investigation and handling of the case. After a careful study of the MLTP Act, the CrPC and the Supreme Court judgements, I believe the law has not been followed accordingly. Therefore, I would like to request you to assess the issue and make prompt response in accordance with the law.
I have also attached a scanned copy of the letter I submitted to the Aizawl Police Station for your perusal. Kindly let me know if you need me to provide any more information.
Sincerely,
Laltanpuia Pachuau
