64
I do not see how any proper cross-investigation could take place in the absence of the accused, and the direction contemplated anything short of a fair and full investigation.
The Capt. Supt. objects to investigating complaints made by the public on the ground that the main object of the Government is the facilitation of hearing, and how a double hearing will assist in this respect.
I consider this objection quite frivolous.
There are many cases in which an aggrieved person would write and complain to the Capt. Supt., but in which he would not or could not go to the trouble and expense, or risk the loss of time in taking out a summons and conducting the case before a Police Magistrate. Moreover, the complainant might be a person in a humble position in life who would not be able to prosecute his case on equal terms against a member of the Police Force.
I maintain that any member of the Public has a right to complain to the Head of the Police against a member, and that the Head of the Force is bound in the interest of the Force to inquire into the case.
It may be a false charge brought out of spite and revenge, in which case the Constable complained against should have all the assistance his chief can give him, or it may be a case in which if the Constable is guilty, it would be the duty of the Capt. Supt. to cause him to be tried and punished by a Police Magistrate under Section 15 of Ordinance 9 of 1862 or to deal with him himself under Section...