CHHATTISGARH HUMAN RIGHTS

COMMISSION

INTERNSHIP REPORT

(INTERN PERIOD:-5th July- 25th July)

SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY:-

Mr. Janardhan Khare Nidhi Pious

(Judicial Service) Student, B.B.A.LL.B- 5th year
Law Officer, CGHRC Jaipur National University, Jaipur
[Email:[email protected]
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, I would like to thanks Chhattisgarh Human Rights Commission, who provided me the prestigious
opportunity to do this internship with them, also I take opportunity to express my gratitude towards my
supervisor Mr. Janardhan Khare, Law officer, Chhattisgarh Human Rights Commission and Mr. Dilip
Bhatt, Joint Secretary, Chhattisgarh Human Rights Commission for extending me all the help during my
pleasant experience at the institution. This internship would not have been possible without their help and
guidance. Apart from guiding me throughout, they gave me utmost freedom and liberty in carrying out my
research. Their moral teachings also helped a lot in carrying out the research, the lessons not just the legal
lesson but also the life lessons I have learned here will always be remembered by me.

I also thank, all the administrative staff of the institution for providing me access to all the relevant
requirements in the office and also extended their help whenever needed.

-NIDHI PIOUS
 TABLE OF CONTENTS:-

S.No PARTICULARS
1. STUDENT DECLARATION
2. WHAT ARE HUMAN RIGHT

3. WHAT IS NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISION

4. WHAT IS STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION( C.G)

5. PROCEDURE AND GUIDELINES FOLLOWED TO FILE A

COMPLAINT
6. CLASSIFICATION OF CASES TABLE

7. CASE STUDY

8. OTHER ACTIVITIES

9. CONCLUSION
 STUDENT DECLARATION:-

I Nidhi Pious, hereby declare that the presented report is uniquely prepared by me after the
completion of three weeks work at Chhattisgarh Human Rights Commission, Raipur. I also
declare that I have adhered to all the principles of academic honesty and integrity and have
not misrepresented or fabricated or falsified any idea/source in my submission. I also
confirm that the report is only prepared for my internship and academic requirement and not
for any other purpose.

-NIDHI PIOUS
 WHAT ARE HUMAN RIGHTS:-

1. Meaning of Human Rights:-

Human rights are moral principles or norms that describe certain standards of human behavior and are
regularly protected as natural and legal rights in municipal and international law. They are commonly
understood as inalienable, fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she
or he is a human being" and which are "inherent in all human beings”, regardless of their nation, location,
language, religion, ethnic origin or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in
the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone. They are
regarded as requiring empathy and the rule of law and imposing an obligation on persons to respect the
human rights of others, and it is generally considered that they should not be taken away except as a result
of due process based on specific circumstances; for example:- human rights may include freedom from
unlawful imprisonment, torture and execution.

2. Definition of Human Rights as provided by the Act:-

The definition of Human Rights is given under section-2(d) of The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
as the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the constitution or
embodied in the International covenants and enforceable by the courts in India.

3. History and Evolution of Human Rights:-

The belief that everyone, by virtue of her or his humanity, is entitled to certain human rights is fairly new.
Its roots, however, lie in earlier tradition and documents of many cultures; it took the catalyst of World War
II to propel human rights onto the global stage and into the global conscience.

Throughout much of history, people acquired rights and responsibilities through their membership in a
group – a family, indigenous nation, religion, class, community, or state. Most societies have had traditions
similar to the "golden rule" of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." The Hindu Vedas,
the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, the Bible, the Quran (Koran), and the Analects of Confucius are five
of the oldest written sources which address questions of people’s duties, rights, and responsibilities. In
addition, the Inca and Aztec codes of conduct and justice and an Iroquois Constitution were Native
American sources that existed well before the 18th century. In fact, all societies, whether in oral or written
tradition, have had systems of propriety and justice as well as ways of tending to the health and welfare of
their members.
  Precursors of 20th Century Human Rights Documents

Documents asserting individual rights, such the Magna Carta (1215), the English Bill of Rights (1689), the
French Declaration on the Rights of Man and Citizen (1789), and the US Constitution and Bill of Rights
(1791) are the written precursors to many of today’s human rights documents. Yet many of these
documents, when originally translated into policy, excluded women, people of colour, and members of
certain social, religious, economic, and political groups. Nevertheless, oppressed people throughout the
world have drawn on the principles these documents express to support revolutions that assert the right to
self-determination.

Contemporary international human rights law and the establishment of the United Nations (UN) have
important historical antecedents. Efforts in the 19th century to prohibit the slave trade and to limit the
horrors of war are prime examples. In 1919, countries established the International Labor Organization
(ILO) to oversee treaties protecting workers with respect to their rights, including their health and safety.
Concern over the protection of certain minority groups was raised by the League of Nations at the end of
the First World War. However, this organization for international peace and cooperation, created by the
victorious European allies, never achieved its goals. The League floundered because the United States
refused to join and because the League failed to prevent Japan’s invasion of China and Manchuria (1931)
and Italy’s attack on Ethiopia (1935). It finally died with the onset of the Second World War (1939).

 The Birth of the United Nations

The idea of human rights emerged stronger after World War II. The extermination by Nazi Germany of
over six million Jews, Sinti and Romani (gypsies), homosexuals, and persons with disabilities horrified the
world. Trials were held in Nuremberg and Tokyo after World War II, and officials from the defeated
countries were punished for committing war crimes, "crimes against peace," and "crimes against humanity."
Governments then committed themselves to establishing the United Nations, with the primary goal of
bolstering international peace and preventing conflict. People wanted to ensure that never again would
anyone be unjustly denied life, freedom, food, shelter, and nationality. The essence of these emerging
human rights principles was captured in President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s 1941 State of the Union
Address when he spoke of a world founded on four essential freedoms: freedom of speech and religion and
freedom from want and fear. The calls came from across the globe for human rights standards to protect
citizens from abuses by their governments, standards against which nations could be held accountable for
the treatment of those living within their borders. These voices played a critical role in the San Francisco
meeting that drafted the United Nations Charter in 1945.
  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Member states of the United Nations pledged to promote respect for the human rights of all. To advance
this goal, the UN established a Commission on Human Rights and charged it with the task of drafting a
document spelling out the meaning of the fundamental rights and freedoms proclaimed in the Charter. The
Commission, guided by Eleanor Roosevelt’s forceful leadership, captured the world’s attention.

On December 10, 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted by the 56
members of the United Nations. The vote was unanimous, although eight nations chose to abstain.

The UDHR, commonly referred to as the international Magna Carta, extended the revolution in
international law ushered in by the United Nations Charter – namely, that how a government treats its own
citizens is now a matter of legitimate international concern, and not simply a domestic issue. It claims that
all rights are interdependent and indivisible. Its Preamble eloquently asserts that:

“Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human
family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.”

The influence of the UDHR has been substantial. Its principles have been incorporated into the constitutions
of most of the more than 185 nations now in the UN. Although a declaration is not a legally binding
document, the Universal Declaration has achieved the status of customary international law because
people regard it "as a common standard of achievement for all people and all nations."

 The Human Rights Covenants

With the goal of establishing mechanisms for enforcing the UDHR, the UN Commission on Human Rights
proceeded to draft two treaties: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its
optional Protocol and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
Together with the Universal Declaration, they are commonly referred to as the International Bill of Human
Rights. The ICCPR focuses on such issues as the right to life, freedom of speech, religion, and voting. The
ICESCR focuses on such issues as food, education, health, and shelter. Both covenants trumpet the
extension of rights to all persons and prohibit discrimination. As of 1997, over 130 nations have ratified
these covenants. The United States, however, has ratified only the ICCPR, and even that with many
reservations, or formal exceptions, to its full compliance.
  Subsequent Human Rights Documents

In addition to the covenants in the International Bill of Human Rights, the United Nations has adopted more
than 20 principal treaties further elaborating human rights. These include conventions to prevent and
prohibit specific abuses like torture and genocide and to protect especially vulnerable populations, such as
refugees (Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951), women (Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979), and children (Convention on the Rights of the
Child, 1989). As of 1997 the United States has ratified only these conventions:

 The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

 The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
 The Convention on the Political Rights of Women.
 The Slavery Convention of 1926.
 The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

In Europe, the Americas, and Africa, regional documents for the protection and promotion of human rights
extend the International Bill of Human Rights. For example, African states have created their own Charter
of Human and People’s Rights (1981), and Muslim states have created the Cairo Declaration on Human
Rights in Islam (1990). The dramatic changes in Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America since 1989
have powerfully demonstrated a surge in demand for respect of human rights. Popular movements in China,
Korea, and other Asian nations reveal a similar commitment to these principles.

 The Role of Nongovernmental Organizations

Globally the champions of human rights have most often been citizens, not government officials. In
particular, Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have played a cardinal role in focusing the
international community on human rights issues. For example, NGO activities surrounding the 1995 United
Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China, drew unprecedented attention to serious
violations of the human rights of women. NGOs such as Amnesty International, the Antislavery Society,
the International Commission of Jurists, the International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs, Human
Rights Watch, Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights, and Survivors International monitor the actions of
governments and pressure them to act according to human rights principles.
 NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION:-

1. Introduction:-
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India is an autonomous public body constituted on 12
October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Ordinance of 28 September 1993. It was given a
statutory basis by the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (TPHRA). The NHRC is the National Human
Rights Commission of India, responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights, defined by the
Act as "rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution
or embodied in the International Covenants".

2. Composition of NHRC (given under section-3 of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993):-
Constitution of a National Human Rights Commission
(1)The Central Government shall constitute a body to be known as the National Human Rights
Commission to exercise the powers conferred upon, and to perform the functions assigned to it, under this
Act.
(2)The Commission shall consist of:
(a) a Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court;
(b)one Member who is or has been, a Judge of the Supreme Court;
(c)one Member who is, or has been, the Chief Justice of a High Court;
(d)two Members to be appointed from amongst persons having knowledge of, or practical experience in,
matters relating to human rights.
(3)The Chairperson of the National Commission for Minorities, 1[the National Commission for the
Scheduled Castes, the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes]and the National Commission for
Women shall be deemed to be Members of the Commission for the discharge of functions specified in
clauses (b) to (j) of section 12.
(4)There shall be a Secretary-General who shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the Commission and
shall exercise such powers and discharge such functions of the Commission2 [except judicial functions and
the power to make regulations under section 40 B], as may be delegated to him by the Commission or the
Chairperson as the case may be.
(5)The headquarters of the Commission shall be at Delhi and the Commission may, with the previous
approval of the Central Government, establish offices at other places in India.
3. Functions (given under section-12 of The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993):-
The Commission shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely:-
(a) Inquire, suo motu or on a petition presented to it by a victim or any person on his behalf [or on a direction
or order of any court]1, into complaint of
 violation of right to life, liberty, equality and dignity
 violation of human rights
 abetment thereof;
 negligence in the prevention of such violation, by a public servant;
(b) Intervene in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of human rights pending before a
court with the approval of such court;
(c) visit, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any jail or other
institution under the control of the State Government, where persons are detained or lodged for purposes
of treatment, reformation or protection, for the study of the living conditions of the inmates thereof and
make recommendations thereon to the Government;
(d) Review the safeguards provided by or under the Constitution or any law for the time being in force for
the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation;
(e) Review the factors, including acts of terrorism that inhibit the enjoyment of human rights and
recommend appropriate remedial measures;
(f) Study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their
effective implementation;
(g) Undertake and promote research in the field of human rights;
(h)spread human rights literacy among various sections of society and promote awareness of the safeguards
available for the protection of these rights through publications, the media, seminars and other available
means;
(i) encourage the efforts of non-governmental organisations and institutions working in the field of human
rights;
(j) Such other functions as it may consider necessary for the protection of human rights.
 CHHATTISGARH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION:-

1. Introduction:-
The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, (an Act of the Parliament), provides for establishment of the
National Human Rights Commission at the national level and State Human Rights Commissions at the
state level. In the State of Chhattisgarh, the CG Human Rights Commission was established on 16th
April 2001. Shri Justice K. M. Agrawal, a former Chief Justice of Sikkim High Court was appointed as
Chairperson and Shri K. A. Jacob, former D. G. P. of Bihar was appointed as members vide Notification
No. 4139/GAD/2001 with effect from the date they assumed charge of the office.
2. Composition:-
Sec. 21 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, as amended by the Protection of Human Rights
(Amendment)Act, 2006 under Chapter V, lays down that the State Government may constitute a Human
Rights Commission which shall consist of :
1. A Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice of a High Court.
2. One Member who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court or District Judge in the State
with a minimum of seven years experience as District Judge;
3. One Member to be appointed from amongst persons having knowledge of, or practical
experience in, matters relating to human rights.
4. The Commission has a Secretary who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Commission.

3. The Present Setup of the Commission:-

Acting Chairperson - Shri M.P. Singhal

Jt. Secretary - Shri Dilip Bhatt
Law Officer - Shri Janardan Khare
 PROCEDURE AND GUIDELINES FOR FILING A
COMPLAINT:-

Who can make the complaint? The complaint may be lodged with the commission by the victim
himself or any person acting on his behalf.

On what grounds can a complaint be filed? A complaint can be filed on the following grounds:

 Violation of any human rights or any abetment thereof

 Negligence by a public servant in the prevention of such violation

What language can a complaint be filed in? The complaint can be drafted in English, Hindi or any
language included in the 8th Schedule of the Constitution.

In what time frame can a complaint be filed? The jurisdiction of State Human Rights Commission
is limited to complaints filed within one year from the date on which the act constituting a violation
of human rights is alleged to have been committed.

By what modes can a complaint be sent? The complaint can be sent by the following modes;

 By post- CG Human Rights Commission ,Near DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) 492001
 By telegram
 By fax- 0771-2235594
 By email
 Complaints can be made in the 24 hours mob. no. of the Commission- 0771-2235591

Does the commission charge any fee from the complainants? No, the Commission does not charge
any fee for filing of the complaints.

What kind of complaints is not entertained by the Commission? Ordinarily, the Commission does
not entertain any complaints of the following nature;

 Complaints regarding incidents that occurred more than a year before the filing of the
complaint.
  Complaints concerning to matters sub-judice in nature that is; matters already pending or
being heard in the court of law or tribunal.
 Complaints which are trivial or frivolous in nature
 Complaints which are vague and anonymous in nature.
 Complaints which pertain to service matters.
 Complaints which are illegible in nature
 Matters still pending before the State Commission or any other Commission
 Complaints which relate to civil disputes such as property rights, contractual obligations,
etc.
 Allegations, which do not point to the violation of any specific type of human right.
 Any matter covered by a judicial verdict/decision of the commission

What must the complaint contain? The complaint must disclose a clear picture of the matter
leading to the complaint. The complaint must contain clearly all of the following clearly, along with
other aspects

 The name of the victim

 The age of the victim
 The religion/caste of the victim
 The State to which the incident relates.
 The District to which the incident relates.
 Date on which the incident occurred.

The documents enclosed in support of allegations, if any, must be easy to read and decipher. The
complaints are expected to be self-contained.
 CLASSIFICATION OF CASES:-
S. Classification of Complaints
No.
1 Custodial Death in Police (PCD)

2 Police Atrocities (PAC)

3 Police inaction. (PIC)

4 Complaint related to False Implication (PFI)

5 Illegal Detention (PID)

6 Other Police related Complaints (POC)

7 Custodial Rape (PCR)

8 Complaint related to Encounter (PEC)

9 Custodial Death in Jail (JDC)

10 Complaint related to Jail (JC)

11 Complaint related to missing persons (MPC)

12 Atrocities against Women (WAC)

13 Complaint related to Tonhi (TPC)

14 Complaint related to Dowry (DTC)

15 Complaint related to child atrocities (CAC)

16 Complaint related to Child Marriage (CMC)

17 Complaint related to child labour/forced labour (CLC)

18 Complaint related to departmental (DRC)

19 Complaint related to Pension (PC)

20 Complaint related to Accountant General (AGC)

21 Complaint related to Health Department (HDC)

22 Complaint related to Education Department (EDC)

23 Complaint related to Pollution Department (PDC)

24 Complaint related to Revenue Department (RDC)

25 Complaint related to Forest Department (FDC)

26 Complaint related to Naxalite incidents (NaxC)

27 Complaint related to Human Trafficking (HTC)

28 Complaint received from NHRC (NHRC)

29 Miscellaneous Complaint (MC)

 CASE STUDY:-

CASE I:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - BSP/91/2008
CATEGORY: -PAC (Police Atrocities)
APPLICANT: -Rameshwar Sahu
NON-APPLICANT: - Jawahar and others
Date of Registration: - 23.5.2008
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 23.07.2015

FACTS AS STATED BY APPLICANT:-

 Applicant states that he is a resident of Darrabhat, Sepat, dist. Bilaspur. He filed a complaint
regarding torture and misbehavior by the non-applicants Jawahar and others.
 Applicant states that Dukaluram has his house beside his house and the courtyard of Dukaluram is
also attached to applicant’s house.
 On date- 19/03/2008 to build the house, base digging was done by the applicant, that time only
Dukaluram came and started using obscene words and after that his son Jawahar came and he also
started using obscene words and both of them started beating the applicant and his family members.
 Dukalu while beating, picked up a stone and thrown it towards applicant, that time only Jawahar
also took a stone and thrown it toward applicant’s brother which resulted in a head injury. Both
Dukalu and Jawahar used hand and punch to beat applicant and his brother.
 In between this Dhaniram and Gangabai started defending them from getting beaten up.
 Immediately applicant went to Sepat police station to report regarding the incident happened with
him. But police said they will file the report after sometime. After sometime Jawahar and Dukalu
also came to police station.
 As Jawahar’s brother is in police, he directed not to file the report of the applicant and rather file a
complaint against the applicant and his brother vishram.
 Complainant also stated that Doctor didn’t treat them further because of police direction.
 Police also filed a wrong case against the applicant under section 307.
 Dashrat(Jawahar’s brother and Police officer) came to Sepat police station with Ishwar(another
police officer) at 6pm and they also beaten up applicant and vishram and put them in jail.
 Applicant also stated that there is no adult man except him that’s why he is approaching this
commission after getting relieved from jail.
 The complainant requested to take necessary action against the non-applicant.
FACTS AS STATED BY NON-APPLICANT:-
 According to non-applicant they were got beaten up by the applicant and the obscene word were
also used by them.
 Non-applicant also stated they got injury when they got beaten up whose report have been submitted
by them.
 They filed a case against applicant under section-307 (IPC).
 Mr. Dashrat in his statement stated he never beat the applicant and came to sepat to meet his father
who got injury.
PROCEEDINGS BY COMMISION:-
 The application was registered; the complaint’s copy was sent to Superintendent of police(SOP),
Bilaspur and asked for report for the same.
 Commission received the report from SOP and according to it sent notice under section 16 to
Mr.Thakur(Inspector),Mr.Dahriya(Head constable),Mr. Dahrathlal(Constable)
 C-50 is the reply given by Mr.dashrat, C-40 is the answer given by Mr. D.P.Thakur, and C-26 is the
answer given by Mr.Dahriya.

RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION: -

The two main points as complained by Complainant are:-

 About Dashrat(Constable) beaten him: As Police Department already taken cognizance to this
matter and taken disciplinary action against Mr.Dashrat and also his pay raise was stopped for one
year as his punishment already.
 His report was not filed by the police officers: The report was not filed by the police as the
offences against him are found to be (Adam dastandaji) for this reason.

As both problems were already solved by these so the commission repealed/cancelled/abrogated the
present complaint filed by the applicant Mr. Rameshwar Sahu.
CASE II:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - RYP/572/08
CATEGORY: -JC (Complaint Related to jail)
APPLICANT: -K.K.Ganguly
NON-APPLICANT: - Dr.Rai Chowdhary & Devcharan Verma
Date of Registration: - 11.09.2008
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 30.07.2015

FACTS AS STATED BY APPLICANT:-

 Complaint filed a complaint regarding violation of human rights of prisoners in Central jail, Raipur.
 Complainant Claims that he was in jail from date: - 1st Jul/2008 to 22nd oct/2008 and in this period
he saw many violations regarding human rights of the prisoners in the Central jail, Raipur.
 Complainant says in his complain that Dr.Rai and Compounder Mr.Verma asked high fees and if
that was not paid by the prisoner, they were not given the necessary medicines and if the prisoner
does any misbehaviour while they are not given medicine for that they are beaten up by the doctor
and compounder and the prisoners were put in the cell by removing their clothes.
 Complainant also says prisoner vishal & Vishnu when discriminated to high fees as asked by the
Dr.Rai and Compounder Verma, they got beaten up and they were put in cell.
 Complainant also says that he was not being given a medicine called “Regilance” & also said the
things brought by the relatives of the prisoners are not received by the prisoners.
 Complainant also says the number one prisoners also sexually abuses the young prisoners in the
jail.
 Complainant also says psychotropic substances which is injurious to health of the any human being
is easily available in jail hospital like ‘Ganja”, “Bhang”,etc.
 Complainant also says that Mr. Pamod(C.O) sells milk, Mr.Narendra(C.N.W) sells eggs & other
staff also sells vegetable, oil, masala,etc in the jail premises.
 The Complainant Requested to take necessary action.

FACTS AS STATED BY NON-APPLICANT:-

 Dr.Rai said that the medicine was not given to the applicant because it was not available that time
but after it was available the medicine was immediately provided to the applicant.
 The non-applicant also said there were no such things done by them to prisoners in the jail hospital
and if so happened why there is no earlier complaint record for that.

PROCEEDINGS BY COMMISION:-
  The commission sent the copy of the complaint to I.G Police and asked for their report.
 CGHRC received a reply which was stating that Sub-Divisional officer (SDO) inquired the matter.
 CGHRC Received a copy of report inquired by the SDO.
 CGHRC took the statements of Mr.K.K.Ganguly, Prisoner Vishal,, Shri.R.S.Thakur, Dr.Rai,
Dr.Sukhdev and Jailer R.K.Singh.
RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION: -

The main points of Complainants complaint which was violation of Human Rights were: -

 Applicant Was not given proper medical aid: This problem was solved by the statement of Dr.Rai
in which he said that proper medicines were given to Mr.Ganguly timely, and when one medicine
was not available the medicine which previously were made available to the applicant, and therefore
we can say proper medical aid was provided to him.
 Applicant says prisoners were beaten up by the jail staff: This problem was cleared by the
statement of prisoner vishal where he said that there were fights between prisoners but jail staff
never beat the prisoners

As the complainant couldn’t prove the statements given by him, so the complaint filed by him in the
commission is Repealed/abrogated/cancelled by the commission.
CASE III:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - RYP/217/2008
CATEGORY: -EDC (Complaints related to education department)
APPLICANT: -CGHRC
NON-APPLICANT: - Bansilal Diwan & Education Department
Date of Registration: - 3.04.2008
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 24.09.2015

FACTS FOUND BY APPLICANT:-

 Suo-motu action taken by the CGHRC from a newspaper’s article on Dainik Jansatta dated
02/04/2008 on physical force applied on examination candidates by centre head and investigating
team. The Jansatta newspaper published a report on 02/04/2008 that in chhura District pre-middle
examination certificate 2008,exams were going on of class 8th students. The anti-cheating
investigation team and District centre-head forcibly beat-up candidates Salik Ram Patel, Jageshwari
Dhruv, Durga Sahu and Indrani Dhruv, causing grave injuries to them. B.L.Diwan was appointed
centre head, being a high grade teacher in Government Higher Secondary School, Khadma.
 The Whole examination team Consisted of Mr.B.L.Diwan as centre head, Mr. Tomanlal Dhruv,
Mr.Khemanlal sahu, Jageshwar Dhruv, Hemant Kawar, Devsharan Sahu & Mr.Deendayal as
supervisors, in inspection team Mrs. Hemkumari Patel, Mr. Ompraksh Sahu, Mr. Mangalmurti.
 When on 1st april, 2008 examination was going on inspection team found cheat paper from a student
named Mr.Salig Ram Patel, he was beaten up by the inspection team members. Ms.Jogeshwari, Ms.
Durga, Ms. Indrani, also were beaten up.
 Which resulted in the violation of their Human Rights, therefore by reading the News CGHRC took
Suo-motu Cognizance.

FACTS FOUND BY NON-APPLICANT: -

 Mr.Bansilal Diwan in his statement said that he is innocent, looking back his past records he has
never been involved into such acts and he also stated by referring to the statement given by
jogeshwari and Durga that as they “no cheat papers were found” So if there were no cheat papers
why would we even beat them. All the allegation put down on us is wrong and factless.
 Mrs.Hemkumari Patel answering said same as Mr.Diwan that if they didn’t had any cheat papers
why would even touch them or talk to them. She also stated that if all three students were in
different rooms how can they know about others being beaten up. She mentioned that she is
teaching since 2002 & has a clean past. She Said the complaint filed against them are false and
malicious.
PROCEEDINGS BY COMMISION:-
 Commission sends the copy of the news to District Education Officer and asked for the report.
 Commission took the statement of Saligram, Durga, Indrani, Jogeshwari.
 Commission asked the Chhura Police station to send the daily register(in which the complaints are
noted down) & also asked to send the medical certificate of the students.
 Commission also sent a notice to under section 16 of Protection of Human Rights act,1993 to Mr.
B.L.Diwan & Mrs. Hemkumari.

RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION: -

The main points of complaint in which was violation of Human Rights were found: -

 Whether the Children were beaten up the Centre head/Inspection team or not: The police
Superintendent reported no injuries to the students. It was also mentioned that the medical reports
could not be provided due to it being destroyed. The Commission found that the witnesses were
exaggerating their claims against the centre head & team, therefore the witnesses statement were
said to be not credible. No sign of injuries on any of the students were found by the hospital staff,
as reorted by them. Also, the team members, being strangers to the students, could not be known to
them but were expressly named in their complaint.

The commission examined the witnesses as well as the recorded statement of the students and found
them to be false and exaggerated. They stand not accepted due to their lack of credibility. The
accusations have not been proved by the police or hospital reports. Therefore no violations of human
rights were found/proved by the commission on the part of centre head and invigilators team.

Therefore the Commission DISMISSED this Suo-motu action taken by the commission itself.
CASE IV:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - RYP/193/2010
CATEGORY: -JC (complaints related to Jail)
APPLICANT: -Ravishankar and other prisoners
NON-APPLICANT: - Kunjlal sinha (Shikshak) Sub-Jail, Gariyaband
Date of Registration: - 25.05.10
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 21.07.2015

FACTS AS STATED BY APPLICANT:-

 The complainant stated that he filed this complaint online too with NHRC, but as there was no
response from there. He filed the complaint in the CGHRC.
 The complainant says that Mr. Kunjlal Sinha, who is a jail-master, doesn’t behave properly while
he teaches in jail. Mr. Sinha always talks about love relations & rape matter in the class he takes of
prisoners.
 The complainant also says that Mr. Kunjlal uses abusive language & defamatory words in relation
to caste of the prisoners.
 The complainant says Mr. Kunjlal eats the eatables brought by the relative/family members of the
prisoner.
 Complainant also states by doing all this acts Mr. Kunjlal does inhuman behavior with the prisoners.

FACTS AS STATED BY NON-APPLICANT:-

 Mr.Kunjlal in his statement firstly requested to transfer Mr. Ravishanker to Raipur Jail from
Gariaband Jail.
 Then Mr. Sinha mentioned that earlier he had filed a complaint against P.D.Verma(Police) to
Superintendent of police and Mr.Majhi (IPS), that he is a non-social & criminal with history of
criminal activities done by him, he also states Mr.Verma played an active role in scam of rice,
electricity, uniform, light, etc & he should be chargesheeted.
 Mr.Sinha also stated that he had also filed a complaint against Mr.Verma & Mr.kurre to the
Honorable chief Minister Mr. Raman Singh regarding they are giving life threatening to him.
 For defending the applicant statement that Mr.Kunjlal is not a good teacher, Mr.Kunjlal presented
to the commission with the past appreciation letter he got for his teachings.
 Later Mr.Kunjlal also requested to take the statement of the Applicant Mr.Ravishanker before the
commission or before the Jail Superintendent, Raipur.
 Mr.Kunjlal also stated that Mr.Verma and MrKurre for taking revenge has filed this complaint to
the commission in the name of a prisoner who is dangerous to the society.
  Mr.Kunjlal also submitted with commission the newspaper cut of the crimes done by the
Complainant.

PROCEEDINGS BY COMMISION:-
 A copy of the complaint was send to Central jail, Raipur and asked to send their report for the same.
 After going through the report send by the Jail Suprintendent, commission sent a notice under
section-16 of Protection of Human Rights Act,1993 to Mr.Kunjlal. to submit the report.
 Under section-16 of Protection of Human Rights Act,1993, Mr.Kunjlal. was again sent a notice to
be present in the commission.
 As by accepting the request of Mr. Kunjlal commission sent various notice to Mr. Ravishanker to
be present. But no response was there.
 A summon was also issued against Mr. Ravishanker but still no response and he was not present on
given date.

RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION: -

The main points of complaint in which was violation of Human Rights were found: -

 Whether Mr. Kunjlal violates the Human rights of the Complainant or not: It was not proved
from the report of Jail superintendent that non-applicant is guilty of the allegation put upon him. It
was also not proved from the report of Jail superintendent that the rights of the prisoners regarding
inhuman behavior are no where proved.

After so many notices and summon sent to the complainant by the commission and no response from the
complainant clearly states that he is conviced with the statement given by the non-applicant.

Hence the commission repeal the present complaint on these above grounds.
CASE V:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - KRY/122/2007
CATEGORY: -HDC (Complaints related to Health department)
APPLICANT: -Dr.P.K.Niyogi
NON-APPLICANT: - Health Department, C.G.Govt.
Date of Registration: - 3.12.2007
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 22.04.2009

FACTS AS STATED BY APPLICANT:-

 Complainant Mr. P.K.Niyogi, surgical specialist, Health Community centre, chirmiri,Korea filed
the complaint regarding non-paaymet of his salary due to departmental irregularities and non-
issuance of join order.
 Applicant joined as assistant civil surgeon on 22/05/1970 and worked till 09/12/1995, he applied
for voluntary retirement on 9/121995 on which government did not followed any proceedings. Due
to non-action on his application he joined as civil surgeon on 21/11/2000.
 He also deposited three months challan on 26/03/2001 of Rs.50550 as per the procedure.
 Director, health services turned down the application on 21/05/2004.
 Neither the applicant was given money back(Rs.50550) nor he was given the joining and was given
retirement in 20/04/2007 wef 31/08/2004.
 Applicant didn’t got gratuity, GIS(Guaranteed Income Supplement),PPF(Public provident fund),
and pension is also stuck and in addition return Rs.50550 with interest to him.
 The applicant requested to provide him the following things.

FACTS AS STATED BY NON-APPLICANT:-

 On behalf of non-applicants Mr. Rajendra Saxena asked for 2 months time to fulfill the demands of
applicants.

PROCEEDINGS BY COMMISION:-
 Commission sent the copy of the complaint to Copy operator Health services and asked for report.
 After getting no response three more reminder letters were sent to the copy operator Health Services.
 Commission took the statement of Mr.Rajendra Saxena on behalf of Health services.
RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION: -

The main points of complaint in which was violation of Human Rights were found: -

 Whether the Human Rights of the complainant have been violated by the non-applicants: To
get pension after retirement & to get the necessary amount after retirement is important right or
human right of an individual, which by not given to the applicant clearly shows his Human rights
are violated.
Commission believes that the facts stated by applicant are fully integrated and correct, as non-applicant
didn’t responded it is presumed that they are convinced with the statement of the applicant.
RECOMMENDATION: C.G. government should provide the applicant with his pension from
01.09.07 & PPF, GIS and return to him Rs.50550 with interest @ 6% p.y. from the date 26.03.2001.
Hence the present complaint is disposed off by the commission.
CASE VI:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - SRG/34/2010
CATEGORY: -PIC (Police Inaction)
APPLICANT: -Ku. Shamima Bano
NON-APPLICANT: - Dhiraj Jaiswal & others
Date of Registration: - 19.03.2010
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 15.10.2015

FACTS AS STATED BY APPLICANT:-

 The National Human rights commission sent a letter to CGHRC dated 14/04/2010 transfering the
case of one Shamima Bano.
 The complainant states that she was kidnapped by the non-applicant in between near ambikapur
while she was going to give her exam in Bilaspur.
 The complainant in her complaint with NHRC stated that when she was going to Bilaspur on
02/12/2009 for appearing in “Shikshakarmi” class 3 examination, she halted in ambikapur, while
seated in the hotel, dhiraj and his accomplices got out of their car, pointed a gun to her head, led her
to their car and forcibly made her sit in the car.
 They beaten her up,covered her mouth, and took her to Mahendragarh and confined her in a room
of lounge for 2 days. There she was subjected to rape multiple times, the non-applicant took her to
baikunthpur and kept her with one of his men, named Pankaj Gupta, she was severly beaten and
further raped by the non-applicant.
 On 1/02/2010 on the day of Holi, non-applicant engraged by her refusal to play holi, beaten her up
with red-hot iron rod, causing grievous hurt in her head because of which there was so much
bleeding and because of bleeding she fainted out.
 Complainant also states that non-applicant is a dangerous criminal, having reported crimes and is
also involved in women trafficking.
 On getting to know about her kidnapping her family members somehow was successful in taking
her back home from there.
 Her relatives also informed about the kidnapping to police, kotwali, ambikapur but the police on the
behest of their higher officers did not lodge the FIR.
 Her family members tried to speak to the IG, Sarguja range but no action was taken then they also
talk to DGP and DGP ordered IG hence no action was taken against dhiraj this was due to dhiraj
being in a nexus with higher police officers and having their help and support.
 The complainant requested to punish such offenders with strict punishments & also punish the
officers who are helping them.
FACTS BY NON-APPLICANT:-

 The non-applicant states that complainant is his wife and the facts stated are wrong.
 He also presented the marriage certificate’s copy for the same.

PROCEEDINGS DONE BY THE COMMISSION: -

 Commission sent the copy of the complaint to the Police Suprintendent, korea.
 Commision received the recorded statement of shamima Bano and Ajamkar Hussain as reply from
the Police Suprintendent.
 A notice under section-16 of the Protection of Human rights Act, 1993 was sent to the station-
incharge in reply to this in his report he stated that when applicant’s sister came to report the case
in police station about the kidnapping, applicant called station-incharge and said not write any
complaint as dhiraj is my husband, and that I am an adult born on 13.08.1989.
Hence complaint filed by the applicant is not true and was a result of a fight between her and her
husband.
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY COMMISSION: -

The main points of complaint in which was violation of Human Rights were found: -

 Whether the human rights of applicant are violated or not: From the facts, it is prima facie clear
that the heinous crimes of rape, abduction, wrongful confinement, grievous hurt have been
committed, and as it is wrong for the police to not to register the FIR. It is directed to police to lodge
FIR and proceed with the advance investigation as soon as possible.
 CGHRC also gave order to the Director General of Police, C.G. to ensure that FIR related to
the case of Shamima bano is registered and proper investigation is initiated.
 HENCE THE PRESENT COMPLAINT IS DISPOSED OFF ACCORDINGLY.
CASE VII:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - KRB/10/2011
CATEGORY: - JDC (Custodial death in jail)
APPLICANT: -Jail superintendent, Korba
NON-APPLICANT: - Jail superintendent, Korba
Date of Registration: - 27.01.2011
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 09.10.2015

FACTS AS STATED BY APPLICANT:-

 Complainant informed the commission who is a Jail Superintendent that one under trial prisoner
named Charma Ram aged 50 yrs fell ill and eventually died on 25.01.2011
 When the prisoner was ordered toconfine by Hon’ble court of special judge under section
302,34(IPC) & 3(2) of SC ST act, he was suffering from leprosy.
 Because he was not well he was admitted to district hospital,korba on 22.01.2011
 On 23rd January, 2011 at 9am, while discharging doctor advised him to take him sims hospital,
Bilaspur for better treatment.
 On 25th January, 2011, when police officers were taking him to SIMS Bilaspur, he got ill and police
took him to District hospital, Korba, where doctor declared him dead.
 Police informed his family members and handed over the body to family members after post
mortem.
 The post mortem report says that there were no outer or inner wounds. An old wound of leprosy
was there. It was also found that in his heart wall a 2*1cm damage of grey color was found which
according to doctors was definitely due to Heart attack.
 The main reason was declared for death in postmortem was Heart attack.

PROCEEDINGS DONE BY COMMISION:-

 Commission asked to present the inquiry report in which it was stated that deceased was already
dead before he was brought to hospital.
 And secondly it is also stated that if as per directed by doctor, if his transfer had been made faster
then the situation have been different.
RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION:-

 The CGHRC stated that as there was no negligence found on the part of police administration as
they were giving proper treatment to the deceased, timely test, etc were done & post mortem report
clearly stated that the death is due to Heart attack.
 Therefore, it is held by the commission that there was no inaction or negligence on the part of non-
applicant & the death was a natural death due to heart attack. Therefore the Present Complaint is
dismissed.
CASE VIII:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - DRG/144/2001
CATEGORY: - PEC (Police encounter)
APPLICANT: -Collector, Durg
NON-APPLICANT: - C.G.Govt
Date of Registration: - 27.07.2001
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 16.01.2014

FACTS OF THE CASE:-

 The district magistrate, Durg sent CGHRC, the investigation Report of magistrate on 27.07.2001.
 The case is about the death of sukhvinder singh during a police encounter on 18th march 2001- 19th
march 200, late night.
FACTS AS STATED BY THE POLICE OFFICERS PRESENT AT THE EVENT
PLACE:-
 On 18th march,2001 at 11.45pm, Mr.Gyanchand reported to Superintendent of police(SOP) that
Mr.Giridhari lal, who is a resident of amrawati came to durg for some work while returning back
Amravati, he was kidnapped.
 Just after the kidnap his family members got two calls from different mob. No. & asked for 10 lakhs
as his relieve amount.
 On the Report filed by Mr.Gyanchan, police lodged a case under section-364A & 365 (IPC).
 The SOP to stop the kidnappers made a police party & put the ransom amount in Mr.Gyanchand’s
car with some Police officers in the car.
 As per police kidnappers were taking Mr.Bajaj to nagpura road but they didn’y know that police is
hiding in different places,
 Seeing police kidnappers tried to change their route, but they got surrounded by police and trying
to move the car in reverse direction they got crash with the tree.
 Police started to catch them but kidnappers started firing, in defence police also fired.
 Mr.Rukman(Head constable) tried to snatch the gun from sukhwinder but between when sanching
was going on one bullet was released and got into sukhwinder throat.
 Due to this other kidnappers satish and subhash were unarmed & taken in custody.
 Near Dharsiva in Raipur- Bilaspur road, in front of one STD booth, Mr.giridhari was there with
abducters named parwez, ashok & another sanjay( who was successfully ran away).
 Police freed Mr.Giridhari from kidnappers & taken the kidnappers into custody.
 Police also admitted to injured sukhwinder to sector-9 ospital, where he was declared “brought
dead”.
  By referring to investigation report by magistrate + CID report received from Police headquarters
C.G, it was concluded that sukhwinder died due to snaching of guns between police MrRukman and
he himself.

PROCEEDINGS BY COMMISSION: -
 Commission took the statement of:-
 Mr.Ajaatshatru
 Mr.ravinder
 Mr.Balvinder
 Satish
 Ashok
 Mahendra
 Mr.Rukman
 Parwez
 Susheel
 Dr.Vijay Kishore
 Mr.Moolchand
 Mr.Dayashankr pandey.
 The accused in their statement said that police unnecessary took them and killed sukhwinder, when
they were returning from dongargarh police took them near place, where one accident was already
happened.
RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE COMMISSION: -

 From the facts it is clear that sukhwinder and his friends were habitual offenders.
 That from the facts it is clear that the death occurred during the police was doing their duty.
 That it is noticed from the fact that others accused except sukhwonder were caught without anybody
being killed.
 After going through all the statement recorded by the commission, it came to the conclusion that
facts as stated by the police men are more reliable and natural.
 Therefore the report presented to Commission by District Magistrate is found without any factual
anamoly, the present inquiry is ended up/ disposed off here.
CASE IX:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - RJN/62/2010
CATEGORY: - PIC (Police inaction)
APPLICANT: -Rupendra Kumar singh
NON-APPLICANT: - R.P.F.Soldiers, Others railway police & other railway police ,
Dongargarh
Date of Registration: - 27.07.2010
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 31.07.2012

FACTS AS STATED BY THE APPLICANT:-

 On date 4th may,2010, applicant with his daughter was travelling in Chhattisgarh express from Agra
to Rajnandgaon.
 Between Salekasa & dongargarh, he went to toilet, when coming out, 2 R.P.F soldiers came & was
putting wrong allegation of smoking inside the toilet on the applicant & were abusing the applicant
with obscene words & they also forcefully searched my pocket and took Rs.500 from it.
 Soldiers stopped Applicant unnecessary for around ½ n hour.
 That out of the 2 soldiers applicant states that one of them has surname “Dongre” & he can identify
the other one.
 Complainant also stated that he made a complain also to the Railway Police, Dongargarh.
 Applicant says that on 8th may 2010 one constable came to his house and took his and his daughter’s
statement.
 Till date o action has been taken against the complain made by the applicant.
 The complainant requested to commission that they should direct the station master to register the
complaint and do the necessary legal actions.
FACTS AS STATED BY THE NON- APPLICANT: -
 On date 4th may,2010, applicant with his daughter was travelling in Chhattisgarh express from Agra
to Rajnandgaon.
 Between Salekasa & dongargarh, he went to toilet, when he was coming out RPF soldiers came
smelling the smell and found smoke coming out from toilet.
 When asked to the applicant about whether he was smoking or not he said yes, and he is sorry for
that with this he handed over the cigratte packet and matchbox to the soldiers.
 The Soldiers then called TTE Mr. Sadavarte.
 The soldiers then told that smoking is not allowed and you have to pay fine for doing it.
 When TTE came Applicant said he was sorry for what he did, and looking one educated and reliable
man saying sorry , TTE asked the soldiers to leave him and didn’t fine him.
 That is how it happened
  According to non-applicant, this complaint is fine by the applicant because he is an Internal
Accounting & taxation officer in District Collector panchayats, Rajnadgaon & his reputation has
been hindered due to this act, and for taking revenge he filed the present complaint.

PROCEEDINGS DONE BY THE COMMISSION: -

 Commission sent the copy of the complaint to SOP(Rail) Raipur, & asked for his report.
 Mr.Sadavarte’s, P.narayana’s, Mr.dongre’s, mr. jayendra’s, Mr.Vaghede statement was received by
the commission.
 Commission under section 16 of Protection of human rights act,1993 recorded statement of
Mr.Dongre.
 Commision also received a report from RPF(Mandal Suraksha).

RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE COMMISSION:-

The main points of complaint in which was violation of Human Rights were found: -

 Whether soldiers used obscene words and referred it to applicant: From the statement and the
facts the commission came to conclusion that yes the soldiers used obscene words which lowered
his dignity & that’s how applicant’s human Rights have been violated.
 Therefore the commission directs SOP(RAIL) C.G. Raipur to take necessary action against
the soldiers and provide its information to the commission within 1 month.
CASE X:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - RJN/63/2007
CATEGORY: - MC (Miscellaneous cases)
APPLICANT: -CGHRC
NON-APPLICANT: - Pankhajur Police
Date of Registration: - 01.05.2007
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 13.09.2012

FACTS FOUND BY THE APPLICANT:-

 The Commision took suo-motu cognizance from a news given the Nai Duniya newspaper.
 A resident of Hurve Village named “Dileram Bara” aged 40yrs was found dead while he was in the
custody of pankhajur police.
 Dileram Bara was arrested on 19th april, 2007 by pankhjur police with his youger son Sunil and his
Brother(like) Nandkishore aged 35yrs.
 Next day Dileram elder son shivprasad came to police station with one of his friend kanshiram and
other villagers, Pankhajur police stopped both of them there only and asked the other villagers to
leave.
 Late night on 22nd -23rd April, younger son sunil returned to village & told villagers that pankhajur
police beat them.
 On 25th april, the news about dileram’s death came from pankhajur police.
 On 25th only deceased deadbody was sent with elder son shivprasad and nandkishore and Rs.25000
was handed over to him, out of which Rs. 200 was given for postmortem.
 Dileram was arrested to inquire about a complaint filed in the police station regarding a missing
person named Gautam.
 Sameer and gautam came to deceased village for work, and they were given work by nandkishore
in deceased house where the missing person disregarded the women modesty and did some wrong
to deceased daughter in law i.e. shivprasad’s wife, for which everyone with anger beat him, he
somehow managed to flew from there.
 Police came to know about the death of gautam, that’s why to inquire in this matter they took,
dileram, his son, and nandkishore to police station.

FACTS AS STATED BY THE NON- APPLICANT:-

 J.K.Arya and Sukhdev Majumdar, in their statement told that they brought deceased to inquire about
the missing complaint filed in the police station.
  While inquiring he( deceased) accepted that he killed Gautam.,and for this police asked to give his
statement in writing and then he can go, but the deceased refused to go by giving reason that village
is 40-50km far away from police station, and requested the officers that can he stay there.
 The officers in their statements also stated that he due to his old stomach ache did suicide.

PROCEEDINGS AS DONE BY THE COMMISSION:-

 After inquiring into the matter commission came to know that judicial investigation has been done
and proceeding against sub Inspector- Gopi Kishan & Head constable- Sukhdev Majumdar on
2/5/07 FIR was filed & they were charged wit Section-347, 348, 306, 34 by the special court.
 On 1/6/09 both of them were charged u/s 348(IPC) and given 3yrs imprisonment + 1000/- fine & if
not paid the fine 3-3 months will be added to their Life imprisonment.
RECOMMENDATION MADE BY COMMISSION: -
 The commission states that from the whole proceeding it is clear that deceased was in police station
from 19th april 2007 to 25th april, 2007
 No person stays with his consent this long in jail.
 As per Judicial Magistrate’s report it is clear that deceased was illegally stopped and oppressed.
 If any person is stopped in jail for 5 days illegally, it is violation of human rights.
 Because of illegal detention and beaten up by police dileram did suicide.
 By comparing compensation amount to violation of rights, the amount of compensation is very low.
 This is the case of suicide by adivasi due to cruel act of police.
 Hence Rs. 75,000/- more as compensation amount to be provided to deceased’s family by 2 months
by the Government; if govt. thinks fit they can recover the amount from Sukhdev & arya.
 The Present Complaint was disposed off.
CASE XI:-
COMPLAINT NO. : - DRG/353/2009
CATEGORY: - POC (Other Police related complaints)
APPLICANT: -Manoj Kumar
NON-APPLICANT: - Crime Scott & GRP Police, Durg
Date of Registration: - 27.11.2009
Date of Order (Recommendation): - 06.10.2015

FACTS FOUND BY THE APPLICANT:-

 The applicant states that his name is Manoj Kumar aged 26yrs working in Shikshkarmii from past
one yaer,Lohara block, durg.
 One night my friend gopal suddenly came to my house & said my father and brother was taken by
supela police & they were beaten by them.
 Complainant immediately went to the police when where identified by the police officer from my
father that I’m his son I got a punch & my friend gopal got 4-5 slaps from police due to which I got
an injury near my right eyebrow & police threated by saying my name is “Gangaram” do whatever
you want to us.
 Complainant states he was locked wth his father in supela, jail by saying you guys said abusive
words & beaten up I.G Sir’s Driver.
 Complainant states that his younger brother bhupendra was taken by GRP police, durg & he was
stopped there for whole night from 11pm to 1 pm.
 Complainant requested the commission yhat as officers who wrongly used their uniform to
humiliate & defame me & my family members should be prosecuted.

FACTS AS STATED BY THE NON-APPLICANT:-

 The SOP, durg in his report said that after taking manoj statement in it he stated that he didn’t want
any investigation against his complaint by the commission & complaint should be disposed off.
 The non- applicant also states that the complaint is factless, unaccountable, and is a lie.

PROCEEDING DONE BY THE COMMISSION:-

 Commission sent the copy of complainant to SOP, durg.

 The copy of the SOP’s report was sentto the complainant, where complainant refused by saying that
my statement in SOP’s report was taken forcibly, last paragraph is added after my signatures.
 Commision recorded the statement(evidence) of MAnoj, bhpendra, gopal ram & bhikari mahto.
  Under section-16 of the protection of human rights act, 1993 commission sent a notice to /mr.
Kailash tendon & Gangaram. Whose reply is in (C-35 & C-65) therefore.

RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE COMMISSION: -

The main thing to be looked after is whether there any violation of human rights: In the present case
if manoj got beaten up why did he not approached to higher officials.
 The complainant did the medical test on 2nd day of the incident from a private doctor.
 The Doctor in his report stated that there is an injury in his right eyebrow & the reason told to him
by the complainant for injury is that he fell down due to it injury caused.
 The complainant didn’t mentioned anywhere why he didn’t disclosed the real facts to the doctor
about the injury.
 Therefore as complainant’s statement cannot be believed the complaint is repealed.
 OTHER ACTIVITIES

 Witnessed evidence recording in the commission of the following cases:-

I
 CASE NO.: - 1121/317/RYP
 PARTIES: -1.) APPLICANT : -ASHOK TIWARI.
2.) NON-APPLICANT: - C.G. LOK SEVA AAYOG
BRIEF FACTS:- In this case applicant made a complaint to the commission
regarding non-payment of his pension, after it he got then some dispute related to
some amount was there therefore he was called by the commission and evidence
recording was done by the commission.

II
 CASE NO. : - DMT/57/13
 PARTIES: - 1.) APPLICANT : -RAMESH CHANDRAKAR
2.)NON-APPLICANT:-MEENAKSHIPATEL & DR. ASHUTOSH GUPTA

BRIEF FACTS:-One Nurse named Meenakshi patel was misbehaved by the applicant.
 CONCLUSION:-

First of all I would like to thank CGHRC for giving me this wonderful opportunity for being part of their
prestigious work. Overall as a law student and a citizen of india one should know their basic rights imposed
upon then and violation of such rights is an offensive act. So, by interning here in this commission it was
an opportunity to know the practical aspect of human rights whose theoretical part we have done in our
colleges. It was an opportunity to know the procedure followed and action to be implemented if basic
Human rights are violated.
As a law student, we can fight and give justice to the people whose right being snached away by some
unscrupulous people prevailing in our society, and hence can render punishment to them and can hope to
bring some quality changes in our country.
The sole purpose of this commission is to protect the very basic rights of people in India. All human being
are entitled to certain inalienable rights and they must be protected. The function of the State human rights
commission is sane as national commission. The victim or any other person on his behalf can approach this
commission to file a complaint.
The Cases dealth within this report by me have provided to me with a deep insight into how the CGHRC
works to fulfill the objective of protecting the human rights of the individuals. The proceedings carried out
by the commission have been made me clear through various perusal and summarization brought in the
commission. The classification of the case dealt with have also brought out the wide view of coverage of
human rights. This commission is doing a commendable job of ensuring that no human rights of any
complainant are violated. It has been my observation that some false founded complaints creep in, but they
are speedily dismissed without wasting much time. This shows that the commission is so diligent in
performing their work.

THE LESSONS (not only the legal but life lessons) TAUGHT HERE WILL BE SURELY
REMEMBERED.
Thanking you for providing me with opportunity of interning with CGHRC.