The Telangana High Court on Tuesday directed the Director General of Police to ‘consider the incident (of preventing BRS legislators from entering Assembly on September 7) and identify the officials who misbehaved/manhandled the women legislators. 

Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the High Court, modifying an earlier order passed on September 7 in a petition filed by BRS Legislature Party, also directed the DGP to furnish a report on the incident to the Speaker for necessary action. The judge instructed the DGP to submit a report on the incident to the bench if it happened outside the precincts of the Assembly i.e. , at the entry point of the Assembly. 

The BRSLP moved the HC on September 7 when their members were prevented by the police from entering the Assembly at the main entry point on the first day of Assembly’s eighth session. Justice Madhavi Devi passed an order the same evening directing the authorities not to stop legislators from entering the Assembly from the next day. 

Clarifying that it was for the Speaker and not the police to take action if any Rules of the Assembly were violated. The judge also directed the DGP to identify erring police officials in the incident, take strict action against them and report to the bench. Seeking vacation of this order, the Hyderabad Police Commissioner filed an interim application along with a counter affidavit. 

Advocate General A. Sudarshan Reddy, presenting his contentions, said while police requested the BRS legislators not to enter Assembly wearing black T-shirts containing slogans, BRS MLA T. Harish Rao threatened police personnel. BRS MLA K.T. Rama Rao made objectionable and insensitive comments targeting the women police personnel. When women legislators were allowed to step inside the Assembly, MLAs D. Sudheer Reddy, Gangula Kamalakar, Padi Kaushik Reddy, T. Harish Rao and others attempted to force their way into the Assembly hiding behind, the AG said. 

The AG submitted that many legislators took off their T shirts in front of women police personnel which was objectionable. These acts at the entry gate of the Assembly fell within the meaning of the ‘precincts of the House’, the AG said. Referring to Hyderabad Police Commissioner’s contention that BRS legislators violated the prohibitory orders, the judge said the First Information Report issued over the incident did not mention any such violation. 

Even the prohibitory orders were against public meetings or process near or around 4 km radius of Assembly. There was no bar against entry of MLAs into Assembly or Council, the judge noted. The authorities did not explain as to why the women legislators were taken to BRS Bhavan when they did not violate any directives of the Speaker. 

There was no allegation or evidence that women legislators also misbehaved with the police, the order said. 

The Tamil Nadu government on Friday appointed senior IPS officer  Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal as the Director-General of Police and Head of the Police Force.

The 1994-Batch IPS officer is serving as the DGP in the Border Security Force (BSF), Delhi. He replaces DGP/HoPF Sandeep Rai Rathore. He was in the panel of three IPS officers recommended by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) as fit for appointment to the top post. The Tamil Nadu government has written to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to relieve Dr. Aggarwal from the BSF, official sources said.

In accordance with the Supreme Court guidelines in the Prakash Singh case, Dr. Aggarwal will have a minimum tenure of two years. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he served as the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, where he launched various schemes, including Drive Against Drugs and ‘Kaaval Karangal’. He was also the Commissioner of Police in Madurai and Tirunelveli. Dr. Aggarwal was the State Police Nodal Officer of the Election Commission of India in the last Lok Sabha elections and Member-Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Police Commission.

Communal murders

As the Inspector-General of Police in the Crime Branch-CID, he supervised the probe conducted by the Special Investigation Division into a series of communal murders across the State and also the sensational train heist in which a north Indian gang broke into the coach of Salem-Chennai Express and took way ₹5.78 crore belonging to the Reserve Bank of India.

In his previous stint at the Centre, he worked in the Central Bureau of Investigation as its Joint Director in Chandigarh.

In the BSF, he served as the Commander, Eastern Command, responsible for more than 4,000 km of the challenging India-Bangladesh Border. Dr Aggarwal is the recipient of the President Police Medal for Distinguished Service and Police Medal for Meritorious Service. He is a native of Bathinda in Punjab, and got his doctorate from  Manonmaniam Sundaranar University.

Inordinate delay

A regular DGP/HoPF should have been appointed with effect from September 1, 2025, in place of the then incumbent, Shankar Jiwal, who attained superannuation. However, the process was delayed for various reasons, including a couple of contempt cases.

In Chennai, 20-25 Non-Traceable Certificates are issued a month by the Police Department, the list generally released on Thursdays. Sought by those who have lost any original property-related document or misplaced an educational certificate that cannot be traced, getting a Non-Traceable Certificate serves as an official document in such cases.

The Certificate is required to be submitted to apply for a duplicate copy to get claims and for other government-related transaction or to prevent any fraud.

In April 2022, then Director General of Police, C. Sylendra Babu, issued a circular listing out various guidelines that should be followed by the petitioner while seeking such a certificate, along with timelines that should be followed by the police department as well.

Many a time, the entire exercise extends for months with various departments including police station in the petitioner’s area of jurisdiction, Sub Registrar Office and Central Crime Record Bureau in the picture.

Documents to submit

The petitioner is required to furnish certified copies of the documents that are lost (obtained within a month prior to the presentation of the petition at the police station from the Sub Registrar Office concerned). Along with this, a recent photograph of the petitioner, a copy of the Aadhar Card, Voter ID or Passport; and newspaper advertisements placed in an English and a vermicular paper are to be submitted.

In case of death of the legal owner of the property, his or her legal heir should present the petition along with death certificate issued by a local body and legal heir certificate issued by designated Revenue Authority.

An encumbrance certificate for the property in question, for the last 20 years or from the date of registration of missing document, obtained from the Sub Registrar office, must also be furnished.

The petitioner is also required to submit an undertaking along with the petition that if the missing document is traced later, the Station House Officer (SHO) will be intimated who in turn has to inform the Sub Registrar Office.

Once an application is submitted, the Station House Officer (SHO) issues a CSR to the petitioner.

Later, a letter addressed to the Deputy Superintendent of Police/ Assistant Commissioner of Police of the DCRB/CCRB is sent informing loss of document along with a certificate.

This is followed by publishing the matter in Crime and Occurrence Sheet within a week from the date of receipt of the letter from the SHO.

The circular insists all police stations to paste it on its notice board and state police website and CCTNS citizen portal to post the circular.

Applications for issuing a Non-Traceable Certificate are also accepted online.

Experience from a resident: ‘A process that consumes time, induces tedium’

From my own experience, I can say the procedures involved in getting a Non-Traceable Certificate is tiring, time-consuming and tedious.

I been running around for the last nine months to get the Certificate (CSR No 778 2025) despite producing all supporting documents.

Three officers who were handling my case were transferred and I am back to square one. Now, the new police officers at Thirumangalam Police Station who have taken charge are asking all the documents again as those filed with the officers are not found. I cite this experience not to meet my ends but to help other petitioners who will be desperately running behind these three agencies, namely the Station House Officer (SHO), Commissioner of Police Office (CPO) and Sub-Registrar’s Office (SRO).

The current system must be amended. For instance, the petitioner may be directed to file their petition with the Magistrate Court with all supportive documents, which could then be forwarded to the police station concerned, with proper instructions for action and report within a stipulated time. The magistrate on receipt of the report with all supportive documents can issue the ‘Non Traceable Certificate” instead of the SHO doing it.

General information on the procedures and documents required should be made available with every police station. The police personnel at stations are not familiar with the procedures and need proper orientation. The officer should also give acknowledgement for the documents received from the complainant as supportive documents for the loss of property documents also get lost at the police stations.

C.B. Paul Chellakumar is a resident of 13th Main Road, Anna Nagar