On Friday, the Gujarat High Court received an affidavit from the state government, notifying the court about the launch of a dedicated helpline with the number 14449, aimed at facilitating the registration of complaints related to police misconduct.
Advocate General Kamal Trivedi presented the affidavit, outlining that the helpline is scheduled to become operational within the next 15 days. Additionally, the initiative will be accompanied by public awareness campaigns to inform and educate the public about the newly established complaint helpline.
This recent development was prompted by suo motu public interest litigation, initiated in response to an incident involving traffic police and traffic regulation brigade (TRB) personnel extorting Rs 60,000 from a couple who were traveling late at night.
During a prior hearing last year, the division bench, comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha Mayee, recommended the establishment of a helpline for citizens to register complaints regarding grievances against the police. The recent implementation of the dedicated helpline, as outlined in the affidavit, aligns with this earlier suggestion from the bench.
In the course of Friday's hearing, Trivedi apprised the bench that upon activation, the helpline number will serve as an autonomous platform for individuals to report cases of police misconduct. Functioning round the clock and mirroring the operations of the emergency 100 helpline, its purpose is to establish a dedicated channel for filing complaints.
The case in question involved an incident on August 25, where Milan Kela, accompanied by his wife Priyanka and their one-year-old son, was returning from Thailand. They were intercepted near Ongjad Toll Plaza, and it was reported that they were extorted Rs 60,000 by two traffic cops and an LRD jawan. Subsequent to the incident report, the accused were apprehended.
Nevertheless, he added that the helpline had not been activated by the relevant service providers, potentially due to technical issues. He anticipated that it would take approximately 15 days to address and resolve these glitches before the helpline became fully operational.
Krina Kalla, representing amicus curiae Shalin Mehta, highlighted the impracticality of the helpline number '14449,' asserting that it should be replaced with a more memorable and easily recalled rhyming number.
In response, Advocate General Trivedi defended the chosen helpline number, '14449,' drawing a favorable comparison to the existing helpline number '1064' for the Anti-Corruption Bureau. He contended that the assignment of special numbers falls within the jurisdiction of the Center and assured the bench that the new helpline number would be actively promoted to ensure widespread awareness.
