Liang Baofu v. Bureau of Public Security of Anqing City, Anhui Province
(A case about disputes over a reconsideration decision on administrative punishment for public security)@#
BASIC FACTS@#
Plaintiff: Liang Baofu, male, 35, farmer of Daqiao Village, Shuangpu Town, Tongcheng County, Anhui Province.@#
Attorney:Zhan Shuangqing,@#
Attorney: Liang Guisheng, elder brother of the plaintiff.@#
Defendant: Bureau of Public Security of Anqing City, Anhui Province@#
Legal representative: Tan Shoujiang, commissioner of this Bureau.@#
Attorney: Zhang Guozheng, Zha Zhenqing, officers of the Bureau of Public Security of Anqing City.@#
Third Party: Wang Chunsheng, male, 26, farmer of Changchun Village, Shuangpu Town, Tongcheng County, Anhui Province.@#
Attorney: Sun Boming, lawyer of the Law Office of Tongcheng County of Anhui Province.@#
Against the reconsideration decision on administrative punishment for public security, No. 050 [1990], of the Bureau of Public Security of Anqing City, Anhui Province, the plaintiff, Liang Baofu, instituted an administrative litigation in the People's Court of Tongcheng County of Anhui Province.@#
The plaintiff claimed that: the third party, Wang Chunsheng, battered the plaintiff, causing petty injury to the plaintiff. The Bureau of Public Security of Tongcheng County decided to impose a sever-day detention of Wang Chunsheng according to law. Disagreeing with this decision, Wang Chunsheng applied for reconsideration to the defendant, and to the surprise of the plaintiff, the defendant decided to revoke the decision of the Bureau of Public Security of Tongcheng County on punishing Wang Chunsheng, in violation of both fact and law. The plaintiff requested the court to revoke the defendant's reconsideration decision.@#
．．．．．． | | 梁宝富不服治安行政处罚复议决定案@#
@#
原告：梁宝富，男，３５岁，安徽省桐城县双铺乡大桥村农民。@#
委托代理人：占双庆，安徽省桐城县律师事务所律师。@#
委托代理人：梁桂生，原告之兄。@#
被告：安徽省安庆市公安局。@#
法定代表人：谭守疆，局长。@#
委托代理人：张正国、查振庆，安庆市公安局干部。@#
第三人：汪春生，男，２６岁，安徽省桐城县双铺乡长春村农民。@#
委托代理人；孙伯鸣，安徽省桐城县律师事务所律师。@#
原告梁宝富不服安徽省安庆市公安局（１９９０）第０５０号治安处罚复议决定，向安徽省桐城县人民法院提起行政诉讼。@#
原告诉称：第三人汪春生殴打原告，给原告造成轻微伤害。桐城县公安局依法裁决，给予汪春生治安拘留７天的处罚。汪春生不服裁决，向被告提出复议申请后，被告竟违背事实和法律，撤销了桐城县公安局对汪春生的处罚裁决。原告请求法院撤销被告的复议决定。@#
被告辩称：第三人汪春生虽然殴打原告，给原告造成轻微伤害。但事后能积极主动地承认错误，并愿意承担医疗费用。被告根据《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚条例》第四条、第五条、第十六条第（二）项的规定，撤销桐城县公安局的处罚裁决，是合法的，法院应当维持。@#
@#
桐城县人民法院对此案经公开审理，查明：@#
１９９０年１０月９日，原告的侄女与第三人的堂弟汪某结婚。次日，原告与其兄到汪某家做客。饭后闲谈中，原告之兄讲到第三人之弟昨天为抬嫁妆，将原告亲戚的自行车胎划破。第三人之弟听到后，与坐在身边的原告争辩，因话不投机，双方拉扯起来。第三人汪春生见后，不分青红皂白，即用手中的腕向原告梁宝富头上砸去，致梁宝富血流满面。原告之兄等人将原告抬到卫生院治疗。经诊断，原告头顶部局部软组织肿胀，有７处不规则撕裂伤口，被缝合５针。１０月１２日，原告向公安部门报案，要求依法处理。第三人于１０月１３日向公安部门投书，承认错误，表示愿意接受调解。桐城县公安局根据治安管理处罚条例第二十二条第（一）项关于“殴打他人造成轻微伤害的”，处１５日以下拘留”的规定，第八条关于“违反治安管理造成的损失或者伤害，由违反治安管理的人赔偿损失或者担负医疗费”的规定，于１１月３０日对第三人汪春生分别作出治安拘留７天的处罚裁决和赔偿梁宝富医疗费等损失共６０１．４７元的处理决定。第三人汪春生不服桐城县公安局的处罚裁决和处理决定，于１２月５日向安庆市公安局提出复议申请。被告安庆市公安局根据治安管理处罚条例第四条、第五条、第十六条第（二）项的规定，以民间纠纷应坚持调解为主的原则和汪春生已有认错悔改表现为由，于１２月１８日作出撤销桐城县公安局对汪春生治安拘留７天的复议决定。原告梁宝富于１９９１年２月４日收到被告的复议决定书后，于２月７日提起行政诉讼。@#
．．．．．． |