Bengaluru: In spite of three other names making rounds as possible incumbents, and as widely expected, Om Prakash, a 1981-batch IPS officer, on Saturday took charge as the Director-General and Inspector-General of Police, Karnataka.
The order was issued by the government in the afternoon. Soon thereafter, he took over the formal baton from the outgoing DG and IGP, Lalrokhuma Pachuau. Upon taking over, Om Prakash said that he would lay special stress on controlling terrorism, excesses on women and children and law and order in general.
He hails from Champaran district in Bihar and has had education in Geology. He has earlier served as ASP of Harapanahalli sub-division in Ballari. Later, he was promoted as SP, State Vigilance Commission and Karnataka Lokayukta and SP of Chikkamagaluru, Shivamogga and Uttara Kannada districts.
He was specially drafted to quell the communal riots in Bhatkal in 1993. He has also served as DIG (Admn), DIG-Northern Range, DIG-Training and DIG Fire Force.
As IGP, he has served with CID, transport commissioner, ADGP (Crime and Technical Services) and ADGP (Grievances and Human Rights).
Rumblings
Sushant Mahapatra IPS is in fact the seniormost police officer in the state. His name was not considered for selection. He has alleged that chief secretary Kaushik Mukherjee was responsible for the supersession by allotting him a mark less in the internal assessment.
Mahapatra has said that he was weighing the options of securing redress in a court of law over his eligibility being ignored and would seek legal opinion. He has expressed severe unhappiness over the fact that his service had been disregarded. He also said that he would write to the chief minister in this regard.
On the other hand, earlier during the day, the Lok Satta party handed a memorandum to the CM alleging that Om Prakash had misused his power in securing permission for his son for quarrying activity in Magadi taluk.
The memorandum has demanded an investigation into the matter. On being asked about the accusation, Om Prakash said that the charges were baseless and that any government agency could hold an investigation and take action if found guilty.
Just as reported: