Why an assistant police inspector needed seven days and intervention from Samir Zaveri and Police Commissioner to register an FIR for a woman?
Police from Nerul, a distant suburb of Mumbai, kept ignoring a complaint from a woman for seven days until activist Samir Zaveri guided the lady and her husband to write to Commissioner of Police at Navi Mumbai. Following the intervention, the police filed a first information report (FIR) where the woman had received abusive calls and SMS.
While the complainant went to Nerul police station on 15th November, instead of filing the FIR, and taking action, the lady assistant police inspector (API) registered the case as a non cognizable (NC) offense under section 507 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
According to the complainant, she received abusive phone calls from unknown person(s) on her mobile from 13th November. Even after complaining to Nerul police, she continued to receive the lewd calls and SMSs from unknown numbers, which troubled her day and night.
Due to the poor response from the police, who failed to take any steps in this case, her husband approached Railway Activist Samir Zaveri who guided him to write a letter to Commissioner of Police at Navi Mumbai.
In the complaint letter, the woman’s husband requested the Commissioner to initiate action against the API for not registering the FIR.
After sending the letter, he received a call from Nerul police station on 21st November, where the lady API asked him to come and file FIR on next day. However, when he visited the police station on 22nd November, the API was not there. He again wrote a letter, mentioning the incident to the Commissioner.
The same day Nerul Police again called him in the evening. When he went there, the police told him to approach the cybercrime cell and register his complaint there.
Due to the poor response from the lady API after visiting the police station several times, he then called activist Samir Zaveri. Zaveri in turn spoke with API and requested her to register the FIR as it is the police’s duty to register FIR. After registering FIR, police has to summon postal address, particulars of mobile users from mobile service providers to take action against abusive callers. Zaveri told the API that, this is not a case of cyber crime, because the crime was committed through using mobile phone calls and SMSs and was not over the internet.
Finally, after intervention from Zaveri, Nerul police registered an FIR under section 66A of Information Technology Act, 2000 and is now collecting more information about the abusers. This incident shows how painful and frustrated it is for a common citizen to register FIR with police, even in a genuine case like protecting modesty of a woman.
The bulls pushed the stock markets up and ensured the bears did not take it down. The entire trading session remained firm, notwithstanding a minor correction which didn’t last long
On Wednesday, we had mentioned that there would be a possibility of a rally, especially if the Nifty trades above 6,060. On Thursday, the NSE Nifty opened above this level, at 6,092, and closed higher. Even the Nifty intra-day low was above 6,060. This signal tells us the markets are strong as of now. Today was derivatives expiry and naturally the market was volatile. It opened strong and stayed that way throughout, fell sharply in the afternoon and immediate rallied to above the 6,100 level.
The BSE Sensex opened at 20,522 and stayed steady throughout the session. It touched the intra-day high of 20,606 shortly after lunch. Then it dipped to an intra-day low of 20,461 after a brief correction which didn’t last long, before rallying to end the day at 20,566 (up 145 points or 0.71%). Similarly, Nifty opened at 6,092, hit an intra-day high of 6,112 then went down to an intra-day low of 6,068, before rallying to finish at 6,106 (up 49 points, or 0.81%). The indices moved up on slightly stronger volumes of 55.43 lakh shares.
All the indices finished in the green, with media, metals, infrastructure and realty performing strong, moving up 2%, 1.32%, 1.56% and 1.36%, respectively.
Of the 50 stocks on the Nifty, 46 advanced and 4 declined. The top gainers were JP Associates (7.91%); BHEL (3.46%); Grasim (2.64%); Power Grid (2.55%) and IndusInd Bank (2.52%). The top losers were Cairn (-1.58%); Cipla (-0.25%); Tata Motors (-0.05%); NMDC (-0.04).
Of the 1,435 shares on the NSE, 797 closed in the positive, 536 closed in the negative while 102 remained unchanged.
Today saw a significant market-related event. Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 Stock Average jumped 1.80% to close at a six-year high on Thursday, on a weaker yen. The Nikkei was up 277.49 points at 15,727.12, while the broader-based Topix index rose 13.96 points, or 1.12 per cent, to end the day at 1,261.04. It was the highest for the Nikkei since December 12, 2007 when it reached 15,932.26. All Asian markets finished up except Hang Seng which stayed flat, with a downwards bias.
Confidence among euro-zone industrial firms edged higher for a seventh straight month in November. However, consumers do not feel optimistic. The Euro area saw its November economic confidence rise to 98.5, as against estimates of 98. All European markets were seen trending up.
The US economy awaits jobs data that will come in a few days. In the meantime, consumers are eyeing Black Friday deals, marking Thanksgiving and the official start of the Christmas shopping season in America (and the West). The US markets finished up yesterday. Futures were also strongly up in early trade.
While market-based pricing can potentially reduce the price for two-thirds of essential medicines, there are far too many loopholes. OPPI has taken an exception to Moneylife DPCO 2013 loopholes article. Here are OPPI views, along with our counterviews
According to the Drug Prices Control Order (DPCO) 2013, the ceiling price of essential medicines is fixed based on the simple average of the prices of all brands of that drug that have a market share of at least 1%. The national list of essential medicines lists 348 bulk drugs, which are sold as 650 formulations. The DPCO itself covers only 14 %-17% of the Rs75,000 crore pharma market, which means only a small subset of the market will be impacted. The good news is that for two-third essential medicines, there can be average price reduction of 22% (even though some reports claim reduction by 30%-40%). The bad news is that there are far too many loopholes to really see reduction in your chemist bill.
Organisation of Pharmaceutical Producers of India (OPPI) had written to Moneylife stating that the article (Read - Medicine prices: DPCO loopholes will deny cheaper essential drugs–Part2) was incorrect or ill-informed; therefore misleading.
Here are the different points raised in OPPI email
DPCO 2013 ceiling price of one-third essential medicines is higher than market leader’s price. This will legitimately allow market leaders to increase their prices.
OPPI view - Under DPCO 2013, automatic price revision based on wholesale price index (WPI) is restricted to the ceiling prices notified by the government for scheduled formulations. As per DPCO 2013, annual increase in retail prices of scheduled formulations on the basis of WPI though permissible is not automatic. Under new DPCO 2013, market leaders who have a lower price than ceiling prices cannot increase their prices. They can only apply for an increase at WPI year-on-year as is for all other brands.
Moneylife counterview - We never said that DPCO 2013 will legitimately allow market leaders to increase their prices. (Read - Medicine prices: Encouraging profiteering from essential drugs – Part1). We said “It (price increase) may not happen, but there is no penalty in case of violation of Para 13(2) of Drug Price Control Order (DPCO)”
DPCO 2013 Para 13 (2) is impractical if not unconstitutional - you cannot have multiple ceiling prices. It is in contradiction of Para 14 which follows - Para 14 (2) says inter alia "....no manufacturer shall sell the scheduled formulations at a price higher than the ceiling price (plus local taxes as applicable) so fixed and notified by the government." - this provision of Para 14 (2) refers to the ceiling price of Para 14 only - there is no mention of the 'ceiling price' of Para 13 (2) in the definition in Para 2 (d) nor is the same referred to in Para 14(2).
Especially in the context of the government automatically not increasing ceiling prices when raw material prices increase as they have in the recent months because of the falling rupee, it is unsustainable for companies except MNCs with deep pockets to survive - therefore violation of Art 14. It is difficult for the government to monitor any suo moto increase of the numerous branded drugs much below the ceiling price, except may be for the well known brands. This may be a recipe to wipe out indigenous industry and smaller players even as companies are being taken over by foreign players.
Once the government fixes the MRP, it cannot legally force manufacturers to sell the same product below MRP, such an order will be unconstitutional
OPPI view - The government can always revisit the MRPs as medicines fall under Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Moneylife counterview - That is in theory. Government record of revisiting prices under DPCO 1995 has been very poor. They have not revisited in time the prices of many items in a list of 74. How will they do this for 348 items and 600+ dosages?
DPCO 2013 due to its fixed ceiling prices will hurt manufacturers who are at the bottom of the price ladder and making very little profit in case there is price increase in raw material, conversion costs etc. Thus in reality the government will be penalizing honest manufacturers.
OPPI view - Any increase in raw material prices will have equal impact on all manufacturers irrespective of their size.
Moneylife counterview – We disagree. Those who are already priced their formulations at a high price will lose less in percentage terms. It will wipe out the lower priced product's profitability earlier than that of the higher priced version - generally that is. But eventually if the government does not act in time (the key phrase is in time) there will be shortages in the market. No government can force (as per some provisions of the DPCO 2013) to make a product when it is unviable. All this does not apply to big players with deep pockets and long sustaining power.
There is no data on prices prevalent in 2012
OPPI view - Probably data is not available with Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS) but is available with IMS and All Indian Origin Chemists & Distributors (AIOCD).
Moneylife counterview - The position as of November 1 is given below and the government has not as yet contracted to source from AIOCD. There are lot of differences in data of IMS and AIOCD.
No. of formulations for which no data is available through IMS
No. of formulations for which sales value (May 2012, MAT) is zero
No. of formulations for which prices have been calculated
No. of formulations where DPCO 2013 para. 6 would be applied
In the second article we will give the remaining OPPI view points and Moneylife counterviews
Read - Drug Abuse