Security Legislation.

Discrepancies in the system to check security agencies, and loopholes in the law make sure that still your most excellent precautions may not be high-quality sufficient.

Former IPS officer and now a lawyer, YP Singh says that a main difficulty with the legislation governing security agencies in the state is that it is more of labor legislation than safety legislation.

The Maharashtra Security Guards Act, Singh says, focuses on service circumstances for security guards and has small room for persistence on expert competence.

“Also, safety guards working for housing societies are not covered under the Act. It mainly covers engineering and office establishments. Hence, agencies working with housing societies typically go unchecked,” Singh says.

Singh adds that a new Act, a middle legislation that covers housing societies, has been in the pipeline, but is yet to be executed.

He says that as the Central law is previously in place, the Maharashtra government should set up a rule require required register and licensing of safety agencies and their safety guards.

“Even if the state enacts such a rule, people still have to commit to their own safety. If the rule is enacted, it is obvious that security bills for housing societies will skyrocket. But people must pay this quantity willingly in order to address security concerns,” he adds.

After the Private Security Agency instruction Act came into force in 2005, it was implement in 22 states across the country.

However, experts say that unlike other states that have a single controlling power for security agencies, Maharashtra has 16 such controlling bodies for a variety of regions in the state.

Gurcharan Singh, president of the Security Association of India, says that like the other states, the controlling authority was the major desk of the home section.