HC questions procurement of SIM on false information

CHANDIGARH:Virtually widening the scope of a plea filed by a counsel in the HUDA multiple plots allotment case alleging issuance of threats to him, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today questioned the procurement of SIM card by the caller on phony details.

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, February 21

Virtually widening the scope of a plea filed by a counsel in the HUDA multiple plots allotment case alleging issuance of threats to him, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today questioned the procurement of SIM card by the caller on phony details. Justice Daya Chaudhary of the High Court also rapped the Chandigarh Police for slow progress in the matter after dubbing it as the “worse force”.

As the plea filed by counsel Harmanjit Singh Sethi came up for resumed hearing, Justice Chaudhary underscored the seriousness of the matter by asserting that documents were illegally used to procure the SIM card. Details of action taken in this regard were also sought.

The development is significant as the Supreme Court had made it clear to the Centre that it was required to implement an effective and stringent mechanism to ensure 100 per cent verification of mobile users. The Centre was asked to ensure that fake or unverified identities were not accepted while issuing SIM cards. The intent was to end fake mobile phone subscribers in the country.

Sethi had earlier moved an application alleging issuance of threats to him. His plea, apparently, led to unearthing of a racket involving use of SIM card issued on fake credentials. Sethi had alleged that threatening calls were received twice on his mobile number. Sethi had further alleged that he received the first call on January 19. The caller threatened Sethi to drag him to the Bandra (Mumbai) court before ensuring his arrest. Sethi added that the person threatening him introduced himself as Rahul from the Information and Technology Department.

In its status report, the Haryana Police had confirmed that two calls were indeed made on his mobile phone but the number was obtained by an unknown person in the name of a Faridabad resident.

As the case came up for a resumed hearing, the UT counsel sought a week’s time after telling Justice Chaudhary’s Bench that a committee had been constituted to look into the matter. Not too satisfied with the response, Justice Chaudhary asked the UT counsel to come out with names of the officials on the panel. The Bench, however, was told just one name.

Meanwhile, Sethi told the Bench that a station house officer and a beat constable did contact him and asked him to call them up in case of any apprehension. Taking a note of the contentions, Justice Chaudhary directed the SHO concerned to ensure safety and file a detailed response to the issues raised by Sethi in his plea.