Human rights in_india

National Human Rights Commission

Human Rights in India

Submitted By:
AVINASH
M.A CRIMINOLOGY 3RD SEMESTER
LNJN NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
CRIMINOLOGY AND FORENSIC SCIENCE.
GGSIP UNIVERSITY, DELHI

CONTENTS











Acknowledgement
Introduction
Meaning of Human Rights
Definition of Human Rights
Characteristics and Nature of Human Rights
Fundamental Rights in Indian Constitution
Main Sources of Human Rights in India
Institutions who protect the Human Rights
Cases of Human Rights Human Rights violation

Acknowledgement
At the very outset I would like to express my deep gratitude and sincere thanks to the
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) for giving me an opportunity to do my
internship.
I would like to extend my sincere thanks to Dr. S.K. Jain and Mr. Vinudev Sachin for
their help, support and guidance at every junction of the preparation of this project. This
project would not have been possible without their help and knowledge.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank all the staffs of library and other
departments who helped in many ways. I also thank the other staffs in NHRC who were
co-operative.
I would also like to thank my fellow classmates, and fellow interns who helped me in
providing their views regarding the topic done in this project.
The views expressed in this report are my own and cannot be attributed to NHRC.

AVINASH

Introduction
Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a
person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being." Human rights
are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for
everyone).

These

rights

may

exist

as natural

rights or

as legal

rights,

in

both national and international law. The doctrine of human rights in international
practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies
of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a
cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights states, "if the
public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral
language, it is that of human rights." Despite this, the strong claims made by the
doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates
about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day. Indeed, the
question of what is meant by a "right" is itself controversial and the subject of continued
philosophical debate.
Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of
residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status.
We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are
all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible.
Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of
treaties, customary international law , general principles and other sources of
international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments
to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect
human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups.

Human Rights in India
India got its independence in the year 1947, just a year before the UDHR was adopted.
The founding fathers of Indian constitution were all aware that India‟s freedom struggle
had taken place in the context of the demand for basic human rights. Yet economic
backwardness of the country would make it impossible to immediately satisfy all the
aspirations of people. So, they adopted a pragmatic approach. They described certain
rights as “fundamental rights” and laid down certain other rights as fundamental duties
of a citizen were also enumerated.

The Supreme Court of India is the guarantor of the rights according to the Constitution.
The court takes into account fundamental duties while interpreting the constitutional
right.

Human rights in India is an issue complicated by the country's large size, its
tremendous

diversity,

its

status

asovereign, secular, democratic republic.

as

a developing

The Constitution

of

country and
India provides

for Fundamental rights, which include freedom of religion. Clauses also provide
for Freedom of Speech, as well as separation of executive and judiciary and freedom of
movement within the country and abroad.
Human Rights Watch stated India had "significant human rights problems". They
identified lack of accountability for security forces and impunity for abusive policing
including "police brutality, extrajudicial killings, and torture" as major problems. An
independent United Nations expert in 2011 expressed concern that she found human
rights workers and their families who "have been killed, tortured, ill-treated,
disappeared, threatened, arbitrarily arrested and detained, falsely charged and under
surveillance because of their legitimate work in upholding human rights and
fundamental freedoms.
All human rights are indivisible, whether they are civil and political rights, such as the
right to life, equality before the law and freedom of expression; economic, social and

cultural rights, such as the rights to work, social security and education , or collective
rights, such as the rights to development and self-determination, are indivisible,
interrelated and interdependent. The improvement of one right facilitates advancement
of the others. Likewise, the deprivation of one right adversely affects the others.

MEANING OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Human beings are born equal in dignity and rights. These are moral claims which are
inalienable and inherent in all individuals by virtue of their humanity alone, irrespective
of caste, colour, creed, and place of birth, sex, cultural difference or any other
consideration. These claims are articulated and formulated in what is today known as
human rights. Human rights are sometimes referred to as fundamental rights, basic
rights, inherent rights, natural rights and birth rights.

DEFINITION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Dr. Justice Durga Das Basu defines “Human rights are those minimal rights, which
every individual must have against the State, or other public authority, by virtue of his
being a „member of human family‟ irrespective of any consideration. Durga Das Basu‟s
definition brings out the essence of human rights.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), 1948, defines human rights
as “rights derived from the inherent dignity of the human person.” Human rights when
they are guaranteed by a written constitution are known as “Fundamental Rights”
because a written constitution is the fundamental law of the state.
Secton 2 (d) of the Act defines "human rights" as "rights relating to life, equality and
dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International
Covenants and enforceable by courts in India".

Characteristics and Nature of Human Rights
Following are the characteristics of human rights:
1. Human Rights are Inalienable - Human rights are conferred on an individual due to
the very nature of his existence. They are inherent in all individuals irrespective of their
caste, creed, religion, sex and nationality. Human rights are conferred to an individual
even after his death. The different rituals in different religions bear testimony to this fact.

2. Human Rights are Essential and Necessary - In the absence of human rights, the
moral, physical, social and spiritual welfare of an individual is impossible. Human rights
are also essential as they provide suitable conditions for material and moral upliftment
of the people.
3. Human Rights are in connection with human dignity – To treat another individual
with dignity irrespective of the fact that the person is a male or female, rich or poor etc.
is concerned with human dignity. For eg. In 1993, India has enacted a law that forbids
the practice of carrying human excreta. This law is called Employment of Manual
Scavengers and Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act.

4. Human Rights are Irrevocable: Human rights are irrevocable. They cannot be taken
away by any power or authority because these rights originate with the social nature of
man in the society of human beings and they belong to a person simply because he is a
human being. As such human rights have similarities to moral rights.

5. Human Rights are Necessary for the fulfillment of purpose of life: Human life
has a purpose. The term “human right” is applied to those conditions which are
essential for the fulfillment of this purpose. No government has the power to curtail or
take away the rights which are sacrosanct, inviolable and immutable.
6. Human Rights are Universal – Human rights are not a monopoly of any privileged
class of people. Human rights are universal in nature, without consideration and without

exception. The values such as divinity, dignity and equality which form the basis of
these rights are inherent in human nature.
7. Human Rights are never absolute – Man is a social animal and he lives in a civic
society, which always put certain restrictions on the enjoyment of his rights and
freedoms. Human rights as such are those limited powers or claims, which are
contributory to the common good and which are recognized and guaranteed by the
State, through its laws to the individuals. As such each right has certain limitations.

8. Human Rights are Dynamic - Human rights are not static, they are dynamic. Human
rights go on expanding with socio-eco-cultural and political developments within the
State. Judges have to interpret laws in such ways as are in tune with the changed social
values. For eg. The right to be cared for in sickness has now been extended to include
free medical treatment in public hospitals under the Public Health Scheme, free medical
examinations in schools, and the provisions for especially equipped schools for the
physically handicapped.

9. Rights as limits to state power - Human rights imply that every individual has
legitimate claims upon his or her society for certain freedom and benefits. So human
rights limit the state‟s power. These may be in the form of negative restrictions, on the
powers of the State, from violating the inalienable freedoms of the individuals, or in the
nature of demands on the State, i.e. positive obligations of the State. For eg. Six
freedoms that are enumerated under the right to liberty forbid the State from interfering
with the individual.

Fundamental Rights in Indian Constitution
The various civil and political human rights and also the economic, social and cultural
human rights have been guaranteed by the Constitution of India and re-christened as
the “Fundamental Rights”.
The provisions of Part III of the Constitution (Arts. 12 – 35) enshrine the Fundamental
Rights, which are more elaborate than those of any other existing written constitutions
dealing with Fundamental Rights. The constitution as amended by Forty fourth
Amendment Act, 1979, classifies Fundamental Rights under the six categories. The
fundamental rights are elaborated as follows:
Article 12 defines the “State” as “In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, “the
State” includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the
Legislature of each of the States and all local or other authorities within the territory of
India or under the control of the Government of India.”

Article13 lays down certain restriction on violating fundamental right. The important
significance of this provision lies in the fact that it makes explicit provision for judicial
review of legislative enactments and executive actions as to their conformity with
guaranteed fundamental rights.

Right to Equality (Articles 14 – 18)

The five articles that cover the right to equality are
a. Equality before law and equal protection of law – Article 14
Article 14 consists of two parts namely equality before law and equal protection of the
laws. Equality before law means that no individual should be given any special privilege
by the state. Equal protection of the laws means the right to equal treatment in equal

circumstances. Equality before the law also means treating unequal unequally. For
example, the Supreme Court has recommended that the „creamy layer‟ of the Other
Backward Classes‟ (OBC) should not be given the benefit of reservation.

b. Prohibition of discrimination on ground of religion, race,
caste, sex or place of birth - Article15
There are four aspects of this right mentioned in following Clauses of this Article.

i. Prohibition of discrimination - Article15, Clause (1): This article prohibits the state
from discrimination against any individual or group of individuals. The principle of non –
discrimination is based on equality and dignity.

ii. Access to public places - Article15, Clause (2): This right provides that no citizen
can be denied access to public places, places of entertainment or the use of wells,
tanks, and roads that are maintained out of State funds.

iii. Protective laws for women and children - Article15, Clause (3): A positive
discrimination for women and children is made in the Indian context. Thus provision for
reservation for women, free education for children etc. is provided.
iv. Reservation for backward classes – Article15, Clause (4):
The constitution recognizes the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Other
Backward Classes as weaker sections of the population. It authorizes the state to make
special provisions for the advancement of these sections of the society.

c. Equality of opportunity in matters of public Employment - Article16:
The aim of article 16 of Indian Constitution is to provide equal opportunity to all citizens
in employment offered by the state or its agencies. This article has five clauses

i. Equality of opportunity – Article 16, Clause (1 )wherein it is stated that equality of
opportunity should be given to all citizens in matters relating to employment or
appointment to any office under the state.

ii. Prohibition of discrimination - Article 16, Clause (2)
This clause prohibits discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex,
descent, and place of birth, residence or any of them in respect of any employment of
the state.

iii. Residential requirements - Article 16, Clause (3)
It allows the Parliament to make laws that require residential (domicile) requirements in
a State for public employment or appointment.

iv. Protective laws - Article 16, Clause (4)
This Clause allows the Parliament to make protective laws for appointment of backward
classes of citizens who are not adequately represented in the services of the state.

v. Preference to certain persons in religious institutions - Article 16, Clause (5)
This clause prescribes that the Parliament can make laws which require only a person
professing a particular religion to be appointed in a body or institution of that religion.
For example, a Hindu can only be appointed as a priest in a Hindu temple.

d. Abolition of Untouchability - Article17
This is a unique article that has been incorporated only in the Constitution of India.
Article 17 declares that not only Untouchability has been abolished but it also makes
any practice and propagation of Untouchability in any form punishable in accordance
with the law.

e. Abolition of Titles - Article18
The Clause of the Article prohibits the State from conferring any title at all upon any
person. However the State is not prevented from awarding military distinctions, such as

Mahavir Chakra, Param Vir – Chakra etc. for honoring men for their acts of valour or
academic distinctions.
II. Right to Freedom (Articles 19 – 22)

a. Six fundamental freedoms - Article19
Article 19 (1), as amended by the Constitution (Forty Fourth)
Amendment Act, 1979, guarantees to all citizens the following six
freedoms:
i. Freedom of speech and expression
ii. Freedom of peaceful assembly
iii. Freedom of forming associations or unions
iv. Freedom of movement throughout the territory of India
v. Freedom of residence and settlement in any part of the territory of India, and
vi. Freedom of profession, occupation, trade or business.

b. Protection in respect of conviction for offences - Article20
This right guarantees protection in respect of conviction for offences, to those accused
of crimes. There are three clauses to this article.
(i) Protection against ex – post, facto legislation – It means that a person cannot be
punished under such a law, for his actions which took place before the passage of the
law.
(ii) Protection against double punishment – it says that no person shall be
prosecuted for the same offence more than once.
(iii) Protection against self incrimination – this clause states that no person accused
of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

c. Protection of life and personal liberty - Article21
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution recognizes the right to life and personal liberty. It
provides that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according
to procedure established by law.”

d. Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases. Article22
The provisions of Article 22 are complimentary to those of Article 21. Article 22 has two
parts; the first part consisting of clauses (1) and (2), deals with persons, who are
arrested under ordinary criminal law and the various rights, they are entitled to; and the
second part consisting of the remaining clauses (3) to (7), is concerned with persons,
who are detained under a law of preventive detention.

III. Right against Exploitation (Articles 23-24)
a. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour Article23
The article prohibits traffic in human beings and „begar‟ and other similar forms of forced
labour.

b. Prohibition of employment of children - Article24
Article 24 of the constitution prohibits child labour. Children below fourteen years of age
cannot be employed in any factory or mine or in any other hazardous employment.
IV. Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25 – 28)
a. Freedom of Conscience and Religion - Article25
Article25 reflects the spirit of secularism and recognized freedom of religion to everyone
in India.

b. Freedom to manage religious affairs - Article26
It recognizes the right of every religious order to establish and maintain institutions for
religious and charitable purposes and manage its own affairs in matters of religion.

c. Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion Article27
The state shall not compel any person to pay any taxes for the promotion of
maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination.

d. Freedom to attend religious instruction in education Institution - Article28
This article prohibits imposition of religious beliefs by educational institutions on those
who are attending them. Taken together the four Articles (25 to 28) establish the secular
character of democracy.

V. Cultural and Educational Rights (Article 29)
a. Cultural right of the individual as well if minorities - Article29
This Article states that every section of the society has the right to conserve its distinct
language, script or culture.

b. Right of minorities to establish and administer Educational institution Article30
The State cannot discriminate in granting aid to any educational institution on the
ground that it is under the management of a religious or linguistic minority.

VI. Right to constitutional Remedies (Article 32)
Article 32 provides for the Constitutional Remedies, under which, one can move the
Supreme Court for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights and this provision itself
is made one of the Fundamental rights. This is something unique. Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar considered it as the very heart and soul of the constitution.

The other rights that are guaranteed in the Indian Constitution are as follows.

r. Right of property - Article31
t. Power of Parliament to modify the right - Article33
u. Restriction on right while martial law is in force- Article34

v. Parliament empowered to make to enforce certain
Fundamental Right - Article35

By the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, the right to property was eliminated from the list of
Fundamental Right. However though it is not a fundamental right, it is still a constitution
at right. It is also a human right. This was recent ruling by the Supreme Court, while
dismissing an appeal filed by the Karnataka Financial Corporation Challenged a State
High Court order.

MAIN SOURCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA
There are many sources of Human Rights in India. The main Sources of Human Rights
in India are follows:
 UN Charter
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948
 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
 1st and 2nd Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
 Convention against Torture
 United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment

INSTITUTIONS WHO PROTECT THE HUMAN RIGHTS

There are mainly three agencies in india who Protects theHuman Rights.
 National Human Rights Commission
 State Human Rights Commission
 NGOs related to National Human Rights Commission
The Commission issued instructions that any instance of custodial death must be
reported to it within 24 hours of occurrence. Such information was to be followed by the
submission to the Commission of the relevant post-mortem report, the magisterial
inquest report and a videography report on the postmortem. Unfortunately, it was
observed that there was frequent delay in the sending of these reports. This in turn
delayed the processing of cases of custodial violence in the Commission and the
awarding of interim relief when, prima-facie, there was reason to conclude that a
custodial death had resulted from custodial violence.
Given this unsatisfactory situation, the Commission has issued fresh instructions
requesting that all concerned reports, namely the post-mortem, videograph and
magisterial inquiry reports, must be sent to the Commission within two months of the
incident. The postmortem reports have to be recorded on a new form, designed by the
Commission, which has been circulated to all concerned authorities. Further, in every
case of custodial death, a magisterial inquiry has also to be conducted as directed by
the Commission. It should be completed expeditiously and transmitted to the
Commission within the deadline of two months that has been set by the Commission.
In certain cases of custodial death, and after the post-mortem examination, the viscera
are sent for examination and a viscera report is required. However, such reports also
take time in being received. The Commission has therefore clarified that the postmortem reports and other related documents should be sent to the Commission without
waiting for the viscera report, with the latter being sent subsequently as soon as it is
available.

CASES OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION

Case1: Illegal detention of S/Sh. Ramveer Singh, Surendra Singh Delhi - Case No.
3454/30/2000-2001
The Commission received a complaint from Shri Ramveer Singh, resident of District
Etah, Madhya Pradesh alleging that he and one Surendera Singh S/o Bhai Lal were
picked up on 5.1.2001 for interrogation in a murder case, illegally detained at the PS,
Mayapuri where they were beaten and subsequently released on 8.1.2001.
In response to Commission‟s notice, a report received from the DCP(Vigilance) stated
that complainant and Surendra Singh were brought to the PS, Mayapuri by Special Staff
without any legal notice and verification and detained there till 7.1.2001. The report
further stated that an inquiry was held against the Inspector, Bishan Mohan of Special
Staff/SWD, in which he was found guilty and was „censured‟ for the serious lapse
committed

by

him.

On consideration of the aforesaid report, the Commission vide its proceedings dated
14.5.2003 directed to issue a notice to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to show-cause
as to why immediate interim relief u/s 18(3) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
be

not

awarded

to

the

victims.

The Commission vide its further proceedings dated 21.1.2004 considered the report
received from the office of the Commissioner of Police and held that there had been
illegal detention of the complainant and Surendra Singh from the night of 5/1/2001 till
the morning of 7/1/2001 in violation of their human rights. It directed Commissioner of
Police,

Delhi

to

pay

a

compensation

of

Rs.

5000/-

to

each

of

them.

In compliance, a communication received from the Dy. Commissioner of Police(Vig.),
Delhi dated 26.5.2004 indicated that an amount of Rs. 5000/- had been paid by way of
interim relief as recommended by the Commission to each of the two victims. In view of
the compliance report received, the case was closed.

Case2: False implication of Rajinder Singh: Haryana (Case No.810/7/98-99)
One Saubhagyawati of Ballabhgarh, Faridabad alleged inaction by the police in regard
to her complaint regarding harassment of her daughter, Savita, by her husband and inlaws. She also alleged false implication by the police of Rajinder Singh, husband of
Saubhagyawati‟s second daughter, at the instance of Savita‟s in-laws. She said that
Rajinder had tried to intervene and get the matter settled, upon which Savita‟s in-laws
had lodged a false complaint against him. The report received from the SP, Faridabad
admitted that the Police Station House Officer (SHO), Puran Chand, did not investigate
the case lodged by the petitioner properly. The case filed against Rajinder Singh was
also found to be false and departmental action had been taken against the SHO. The
Commission, after considering the report, held that a false case had been registered
against Rajinder Singh, and the petitioner and her family had to undergo mental torture.
It therefore issued a show cause notice to the SP, Faridabad as to why an amount of
Rs.10,000 be not paid to the petitioner and Rajinder Singh. In reply, the Senior
Superintendent of Police (SSP) pleaded that the case against Rajinder Singh was
cancelled after it was found to be false and that no grounds therefore remained for the
award of compensation. Meeting on 18 September 2001, the Commission however held
that the very fact that the erring officials had committed lapses and had been dealt with
departmentally, was sufficient, prima facie, to establish that there were valid reasons for
the grant of immediate interim relief. The Commission accordingly directed payment of
compensation in the amount of Rs.10,000 to the petitioners. The amount was paid soon
thereafter.

Case3: Death of Salman Dinkar Padvi in Police Firing: Maharashtra (Case
No.1332/13/2000-2001/FC)
Dinakar B. Padvi, Nandurbar, Maharashtra filed a complaint with the Commission
alleging that on 28 June 2000 one leopard entered Khapar town in Taluk Akkalkua,
Nan-Durbar, Maharashtra. Intrigued by the leopard many people gathered to see it. The
Police too tried to catch the leopard alive but as they did not succeed, they opened fire.
According to the complainant, his son Salman Dinkar Padvi was seriously injured in the
police firing and later succumbed to his injuries in the government hospital. The
Commission called for a report in this matter from the Director General of Police,
Maharashtra. In response the Deputy Conservator of Forests admitted to the fact that
Salman Dinkar Padvi had died in the police firing. The Commission also observed that
simply because it was an accidental death it did not absolve the State Government of its
responsibility to pay immediate interim relief under section 18(3) of the Act. to the legal
heirs of the deceased, who according to the complainant was the only bread-winner of
the

family.

Considering the fact that the sole bread-winner of the family had died in the firing, the
Commission directed that it be inquired from the Chief Secretary whether the State
Government had given any relief-ex-gratia or otherwise to the next of kin of the
deceased and, if not, whether the Government was considering the grant of some
monetary

relief

to

the

next

of

kin.

In a subsequent report, Superintendent of Police, Nandurbar, Maharashtra sent a report
stating that the dependents of the victim Salman Dinkar Padvi had been granted relief of
Rs. One Lakh from the Chief Minister‟s Relief Fund and also confirmed disbursement of
the amount. The Commission has since closed the case.

Case4: Torture and gang rape by police officers in Tripura - Case No. 5/23/20032004-WC
The Commission received a complaint from Shri Suhas Chakma, Director, Asian Centre
for Human Rights, New Delhi alleging that a Reang girl was tortured and gang raped by
a group of three Special Police Officers of the State Government of Tripura on
26/5/2003. The victim girl‟s family complained to the police station naming the three
guilty

SPOs

but

their

complaint

was

not

recorded.

In response to the notice, a report received from the DGP, Tripura indicated that a case
No. 6/2003 u/s 366 (A), 376, 326 and 34 IPC was registered in Police Station
Raishyabari against the three named persons on 28/5/2003. The medical report
confirmed that the victim, aged 17 years was sexually assaulted and raped. The three
SPOs had been discharged from the service, arrested and sent to jail. In view of the
gravity of the allegation of sexual brutality committed on a hapless girl by the three
SPOS, the Commission directed to issue a notice to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of
Tripura to show cause why interim relief be not granted to the victim girl.
The Govt. of Tripura informed the Commission that it had paid an amount of Rs.
15,000/- as compensation to the victim Ms. Mithirung Reang. However, the Commission
observed that the offence of rape not only amounts to violation of the human rights of
the victim, but it also tends to violate the mind and scar the psyche of a person
permanently. Besides, it carries a social sigma for the victim and her family. The
Commission, therefore, directed the Govt. of Tripura to pay an amount of Rupees fifty
thousand as immediate interim relief to the victim after adjusting Rupees fifteen
thousand already paid. As the State Government submitted its compliance report in
respect of payment of an amount of Rupees thirty five thousand, the case was closed
on 10/1/2005.

Case5: Negligence of police personnel leading to wrongful confinement of lkramud-din: Uttar Pradesh (Case No.23239/24/1999-2000)
The Commission received a complaint dated 14 January 2000 from Shri Ikramuddin, a
resident of District Bagpat, Uttar Pradesh alleging that a case was registered at the
Police Station Baraut against Ikramu, a resident of Baraut. During trial, the accused did
not appear in the court and non-bailable warrant was issued against him. The police
instead of arresting ikramu, arrested Ikramuddin on 20 June 1999, despite his protest.
He was released on bail by the court, after filing an affidavit that he was not the accused
in the case. A prayer was, therefore, made for stern action against the errant police
officials

and

for

compensation.

Upon notice being issued, the Superintendent of Police, Bagpat submitted a report
which indicated that the Sub-Inspector, Head Constable and the Constable of Police
Station, Baraut had been found guilty of dereliction of duty inasmuch as they did not
make a proper verification before arrest and also because they had made wrong entries
in the record. A departmental inquiry had been instituted against the errant police
officials.

Having regard to these facts which were admitted by the police, the Commission held
that the complainant had suffered great financial loss and mental agony due to wrongful
confinement on account of negligence of police officials and directed the issue of a
show cause notice under Section 18 (3) of the Act to the Government of Uttar Pradesh.

In response to the show cause notice, a report was submitted by the Special Secretary,
Home Department, Uttar Pradesh indicating that the errant police personnel had been
awarded the punishment of censure. The report added that since the police had not
beaten and caused injuries to the complainant, he was not entitled to any financial
assistance.

By its proceedings dated 11 October 2002, the Commission held that the complainant
had been compelled to remain in jail for about one and a half months and that he had
incurred and expenditure of Rs. 10,000/- to get himself released. Having regard to all
the circumstances of the case, the Commission therefore directed the State of Uttar
Pradesh, through its Chief Secretary, to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as immediate interim
relief under Section 18 (3) of the Act, to the complainant within 8 weeks.

Human rights in_india

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Human rights in_india

More from Avinash Rajput

Recently uploaded

Human rights in_india