The police will now have to set up a system to track persons who have either pleaded guilty or were convicted by a court for putting up banners, flexes, hoardings illegally in violation of the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981.
The State government said that it will set up a tracking system with a proper data base in the city crime records bureau after a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice R. Devdas suggested that a tracking system is a must to ensure that those who pleaded guilty or were convicted should not repeat them.
The bench made the suggestion after Advocate General Udaya Holla informed that the accused in 56 cases in which the charge sheets were filed based on detection of illegally putting up banners, posters, flexes and hoardings through closed circuit camera surveillance and police patrolling. The guilty were fined ₹1,000 each by a specially designated magistrate court.
The proceedings in all the 234 cases are under way on a day-to-day basis as per the high court’s direction to complete the criminal proceedings by the end of August.
Observing that the intention of the court is not to treat every person who had put up banners or posters or flexes as having criminal intent, as some might be unaware of the law, the bench made it clear that a tracking system will be helpful to detect the real offenders when they try to repeat the illegal acts.
The bench was hearing PIL petitions through which the court is monitoring the process of removal of illegal flexes, banners, and hoardings by the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), and the actions of the police in preventing and prosecuting persons who put up such materials illegally, and had set a deadline for the BBMP to come out with an advertisement policy.
1,192 responses
BBMP counsel informed the court that it has received 1,192 responses from owners of the properties and the advertisement agencies claiming that they did obtain licences from the BBMP to put up structures for display of advertisement. All these responses would be scrutinised and decision would be take by August 27, the counsel said while pointing out that in 70 cases, the high court and the city civil court had granted a stay against removal of illegal advertisement hoarding structures out of 112 petitions filed in the high court and 90 suits filed in the civil court.
The bench indicated that it is better to have a uniform advertisement hoarding policy for all the local bodies, municipal bodies or panchayats in the State, and asked the Advocate-General to verify whether there exists any policy in this regard. Further hearing was adjourned till August 31.
