INTERNSHIP REPORT

2021-22
CHHATTISGARH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Tanisha Jaggi
3rd year B.B.A LL.B(H)
Amity law school, Amity University Chhattisgarh
S.no Topic
1. Declaration
2. Acknowledgment
3. Human rights
4. Evolution of human rights
5. Need for human rights
6. National human rights commission
7. Functions of national human rights commission
8. Number of human rights commissions
9. Chhattisgarh human rights commission
10. Functions of CGHRC
11. Classification of complaints
12. Procedure followed
13. Review of cases
14. Conclusion
 Declaration
I Tanisha Jaggi student of amity university Chhattisgarh hereby solemnly
declare that the work presented in this internship report has been carried out by
me and has not been previously submitted to any other university, college and
organization for any academic qualification, certificate and degree.

Tanisha Jaggi
B.B.A LL.B (H) 3rd year
Amity University Chhattisgarh
 Acknowledgement
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the Chhattisgarh human rights
commission, Raipur for giving us the opportunity to intern with them. The lessons
learned here will always be remembered by me.

I would like to special thanks and gratitude to Mr. Girdhari Nayak, chairman;
Mr. Tajuddin Asif, law officer; Mrs. Jyoti Agrawal, deputy secretary; Mr.
Manish Mishra, joint director for their support and guidance and their constant
direction and advice which would help me for my future career.

I would like to thank my college Amity university Chhattisgarh for letting us

intern at such esteem commission and giving such great opportunity to learn and
explore.

At last, I would like to thank everybody associated with my endeavor to intern at

this office directly or indirectly and I will strive use gained skills in the best
possible way.
 What are human rights?
Human rights are rights we have simply because we exist as human beings - they
are not granted by any state. These universal rights are inherent to us all,
regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language,
or any other status. They range from the most fundamental - the right to life - to
those that make life worth living, such as the rights to food, education, work,
health, and liberty. Human rights are inalienable. They should not be taken away,
except in specific situations and according to due process. For example, the right
to liberty may be restricted if a person is found guilty of a crime by a court of law .
 Evolution of human rights
The history of human rights covers thousands of years and draws upon religious,
cultural, philosophical and legal developments throughout the recorded history.
It seems that the concept of human rights is as old as the civilization. This is
evident from the fact that almost at all stages of mankind there have been a human
rights documents in one form or the other in existence. Several ancient documents
and later religious and philosophies included a variety of concepts that may be
considered to be human rights. Notable among such documents are the Edicts of
Ashoka issued by Ashoka the Great of India between 272-231 BC and the
Constitution of Medina of 622 AD, drafted by Muhammad to mark a formal
agreement between all of the significant tribes and families of Yathrib (later
known as Medina). However, the idea for the protection of human rights grew
after the tragic experiences of the two world wars. Prior to the world war, there
was not much codification done either at the national or the international levels
for the protection and implementation of human rights.
 Need for human rights
#1: Human rights ensure people have basic needs met
Everyone needs access to medicine, food and water, clothes, and shelter. By
including these in a person’s basic human rights, everyone has a baseline level
of dignity. Unfortunately, there are still millions of people out there who don’t
have these necessities, but saying it’s a matter of human rights allows activists
and others to work towards getting those for everyone.
#2: Human rights protect vulnerable groups from abuse
The Declaration of Human Rights was created largely because of the Holocaust
and the horrors of WII. During that time in history, the most vulnerable in
society were targeted along with the Jewish population, including those with
disabilities and LGBT. Organizations concerned with human rights focus on
members of society most vulnerable to abuse from powerholders, instead of
ignoring them.
#3: Human rights allow people to stand up to societal corruption
The concept of human rights allows people to speak up when they experience
abuse and corruption. This is why specific rights like the right to assemble are
so crucial because no society is perfect. The concept of human rights empowers
people and tells them that they deserve dignity from society, whether it’s the
government or their work environment. When they don’t receive it, they can
stand up.
#4: Human rights encourage freedom of speech and expression
While similar to what you just read above, being able to speak freely without
fear of brutal reprisal is more expansive. It encompasses ideas and forms of
expression that not everybody will like or agree with, but no one should ever
feel like they are going to be in danger from their government because of what
they think. It goes both ways, too, and protects people who want to debate or
argue with certain ideas expressed in their society.
#5: Human rights give people the freedom to practice their religion (or not
practice any)
Religious violence and oppression occur over and over again all across history,
from the Crusades to the Holocaust to modern terrorism in the name of religion.
Human rights acknowledge the importance of a person’s religion and spiritual
beliefs, and lets them practice in peace. The freedom to not hold to a religion is
also a human right.
#6: Human rights allows people to love who they choose
The importance of freedom to love cannot be understated. Being able to choose
what one romantic life looks likes is an essential human right. The
consequences of not protecting this right are clear when you look at countries
where LGBT people are oppressed and abused, or where women are forced into
marriages they don’t want.
#7: Human rights encourage equal work opportunities
The right to work and make a living allows people to flourish in their society.
Without acknowledging that the work environment can be biased or downright
oppressive, people find themselves enduring abuse or insufficient opportunities.
The concept of human rights provides a guide for how workers should be
treated and encourages equality.
#8: Human rights give people access to education
Education is important for so many reasons and is crucial for societies where
poverty is common. Organizations and governments concerned with human
rights provide access to schooling, supplies, and more in order to halt the cycle
of poverty. Seeing education as a right means everyone can get access, not just
the elite.
#9: Human rights protect the environment
The marriage between human rights and environmentalism is becoming
stronger due to climate change and the effects it has on people. We live in the
world, we need the land, so it makes sense that what happens to the
environment impacts humanity. The right to clean air, clean soil, and clean
water are all as important as the other rights included in this list.
#10: Human rights provide a universal standard that holds governments
accountable
When the UDHR was released, it had a two-fold purpose: provide a guideline
for the future and force the world to acknowledge that during WWII, human
rights had been violated on a massive scale. With a standard for what is a
human right, governments can be held accountable for their actions. There’s
power in naming an injustice and pointing to a precedent, which makes the
UDHR and other human right documents so important.
 National human rights commission
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India is a Statutory 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 (PHRA). 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 and enforceable by courts in India”. The head quarter of national
human rights commission of India is in Delhi, sardar Patel Bhawan and present
chairman of NHRC is justice Arun Mishra.
 Functions of national human rights commission
The Protection of Human Rights Act mandates the NHRC to perform the
following:

 Proactively or reactively inquire into violations of human rights by

government of India or negligence of such violation by a public servant
 the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective
implementation
 review the factors, including acts of terrorism that inhibit the enjoyment of
human rights and recommend appropriate remedial measures
 to study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and
make recommendations for their effective implementation
 undertake and promote research in the field of human rights
 to visit jails and study the condition of inmates
 engage in human rights education 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
encourage the efforts of NGOs and institutions that works in the field of
human rights voluntarily.
 Considering the necessity for the protection of human rights.
 requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office.
 Number of State human rights commissions
At present, there is one national human rights commission & 26 states have
constituted state human rights commission are the following:
State Commission City

Assam Human rights Commission

Andhra Pradesh State Human rights Commission

Bihar Human rights Commission

Chhattisgarh Human Rights Commission

Gujarat State Human Rights Commission

Goa Human Rights Commission

Meghalaya State Human Right Commission

Himachal Pradesh State Human rights Commission

Jammu & Kashmir Human Rights Commission

Kerala State Human Rights Commission

Karnataka State Human Rights Commission

Madhya Pradesh Human Rights Commission

Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission

Manipur State Human Rights Commission

Odisha Human rights Commission

Punjab State Human Rights Commission

Rajasthan State Human rights Commission

State Human Rights Commission Tamil Nadu

Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission

West Bengal Human Rights Commission

Jharkhand State Human Rights Commission

Sikkim State Human Rights Commission

Uttarakhand Human Rights Commission

Haryana Human Rights Commission

Tripura Human rights Commission

Telangana State Human Rights Commission

 Chhattisgarh human rights commission
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 member vide Notification No. 4139/GAD/2001 with effect
from the date they assumed charge of the office.
 Functions of CGHRC
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, into complaint of
(i) Violation of human rights or abetment thereof or
(ii) 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 to the State Government, any jail or any other institution under the
control of the State Government, where persons are detained or lodged for
purposes of treatment, reformation or protection to study the living conditions
of the inmates and make recommendations thereon;
(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) Undertake and promote research in the field of human rights;
(g) 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;
(h) Encourage the efforts of non-governmental organizations and institutions
working in the field of human rights;
(i) Such other functions as it may consider necessary for the protection of
human rights.
 Classification of complaints
S. No. &Classification of Complaints
1.Custodial Death in Police
2.Police Atrocities
3.Police inaction.
4.Complaint related to False Implication
5.Illegal Detention
6.Other Police related Complaints
7.Custodial Rape
8.Complaint related to Encounter
9.Custodial Death in Jail
10.Complaint related to jail
11.omplaint related to missing persons
12.Atrocities against Women
13.omplaint related to Dowry
14.omplaint related to Child Marriage
15.Complaint related to child labor/forced labor
16.complaint related to departmental
17.Complaint related to Pension
18.Complaint related to Accountant General
19.Complaint related to Health Department
20.Complaint related to Education Department
21.Complaint related to Pollution Department
22.Complaint related to Revenue Department
23.Complaint related to Forest Department
24.Complaint related to Naxalite incidents
25.Complaint related to Human Trafficking
 Procedure followed
Inquiry into complaints
The Commission while inquiring into the complaints of violations of human
rights may-
(i) call for information or report form the central Government or any State
Government or any other authority or organization subordinate thereto within
such time as may be specified by it:
Provided that-
(a) if the information or report is not received within the time stipulated by the
commission, it may proceed to inquire into the complaint on its own:
(b) if, on receipt of information or report, the commission is satisfied either that
nor further inquiry is required or that the required action has been initiated or
taken by the concerned Government or authority it may not proceed with the
complaint an inform the complainant accordingly;
(ii) without prejudice to anything contained in clause (I), if it considers
necessary, having regard to the nature of the complaint, initiate an inquiry.
Steps after inquiry
The Commission may take any of the following steps upon the completion of an
inquiry held under this act, namely:-
(1) where the inquiry discloses, the commission of violation of human rights or
negligence in the prevention of violation of human rights by a public servant, it
may recommend to the concerned Government or authority the initiation of
proceedings for prosecution or such other auction as the Commission may deem
fit against the concerned person or persons;
(2) Approach the Supreme Court or the High Court Concerned for such
directions, orders or writs as that court may deemed necessary;
(3) Recommend to the concerned Government or authority for the grant of such
immediate interim relief to the victim or the members of his family as the
commission may consider necessary;
(4) Subject to the provisions of clause (5) provide a copy of the inquiry report to
the petitioner or his representative;
(5) the Commission shall send a copy of its inquiry report together with its
recommendations to the concerned Government or authority and the concerned
Government or authority shall, within a period of one month, or such farther
time as the commission may allow, forward its comments on the report,
including the action taken or proposed to be taken thereon, to the Commission.
(6) the Commission shall publish its inquiry report together with the comments
of the concerned Government or authority if any, and the action taken or
proposed to be taken by the concerned Government or authority on the
recommendations of the Commission.
Procedure with respect to armed forces. -
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this act, while dealing with
complaints of violation of human rights by members of the armed forces, the
commission shall adopt the following procedure, namely: -
(a) it may, either on its own motion or on receipt of a petition, seek a report
from the Central Government;
(b) after the receipt of the report, it may, either not proceed with the complaint
or, as the case may be, make its recommendations to that Government.
(2) The Central Government shall inform the Commission of the action taken on
the recommendations within three months or such further time as the
commission may allow.
(3) The Commission shall publish its report together with its recommendations
made to the central Government and the action taken by that Government on
such recommendations.
(4) The Commission shall provide a copy of the report published under sub-
section (3) to the petitioner or his representative.
Annual and special reports of the Commission. -
(1) The commission shall submit an annual report to the Central Government
and to the State Government concerned and a may at any time submit special
reports on any matter which, in its opinion, is of such urgency or importance
that it should not be deferred till submission of the annual report.
(2) The Central Government and the State Government as the case may be shall
cause the annual and special reports of the commission to be laid before each
House of Parliament or the state Legislature respectively, as the case may be,
along with a memorandum of action taken or proposed to be taken on the
recommendations of the commission and the reasons for non-acceptance of the
recommendations, if any.
 Case no. 1
Registration date - 10/7/13 Case No-DMT/44/2013/POC

District- Dhamtri

Classification - Other Police related complaints (POC)

Applicant's Name - Santosh Kumar Nirmalkar

Non-Applicant's Name-Constable Devcharan sinha

Subject- Take Action against constable

Facts of the Case-

On 06/06/13 Santosh Kumar Nirmalkar was returning to samera around

7:30pm.on his way near girjhar village police station, coming from opposite
direction, without headlight turned on a motorbike, (in speed) coming to him was
Constable Devcharan. As he was in civil dress not forgetting at that time he was
drunk too. The Applicant asked him to turn on his headlight to which the
constable replied in an abusive manner and started saying slangs to him. Also he
made his motorcycle stand in front of the Applicant's motorcycle, stopping his
way.

He took out the helmet of the Applicant and slapped and beated him very badly.
He also threatened him to make him accuse of false case. He took the helmet
along him to the police station and also, cursed him (Applicant) badly in the
police station. Later on When the Applicant got home, the same night he had pain
in ear and noticed blood in his ear for 2-3 days he went to the hospital for
treatment. The Doctor informed him that he has his ear injured, and in his left ear
his has his eardrums injured. On 15.6.13 the Applicant along with his father and
& other people went to Birajhar police station to register FIR. On which the
incharge pressurized Him to have the settlement. The Applicant seeked for relief
and justice.

Procedure

After the Application was registered in HRC the process was followed. Summons
were made by the commission to the Non Applicant and other witnesses claimed
by the non-applicant under section 13(1) (A) of Protection of Human Rights Act,
1993.

Notices were sent to the police officer of dhamtri and Non Applicant under
Section 16 of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

On 25-11-13 an order by office of the superintendent of police, District,dhamtri

(C.G) was given to constable devracharan stating the punishment

Of withholding of one year increment with Cumulative effect is gives for

tarnishing the image of police department by committing a derogatory Act.

on 27/7/15 statements by the Non-Applicant was given stating the explanations

of the case, claiming all that has been said it false but It was found that if it all
was false he wouldn't be ready for the settlement, which again make the
statements of the Applicant true the other records were also received by the
Applicant and making the case stronger for the Applicant

Judgement

On 8/3/19 compensation of Rs25000/- has been paid to the Applicant Under

victim compensation scheme 2011.
 Case No. 2
Registration Date - 24/02/16 Case No-269/2016 / BSP/DRE

District- Bilaspur

Classification - complaints related to departmental (DRC)

Applicant's Name-Munni bai shrivastav

Non Applicant's Name - Registrar.

subject -In relation to the payment of family person, and other remaining titles
after the death of the government employee shri Rajendra Prasad

Facts of the Case

Munnibai w/o late shri Rajendra Prasad, has filed application for non-payment of
pension of her late husband who retired from the post of section officer from
Ghasidas University on 30.6.2008 and died on 19.12.2015

Regarding the payment of Pension and other titles Rights, commission has asked
the university to pay the amount (after investigating the entire matter) till that date
the payment of pension and other titles have not been done. The root cause of the
death of Mr Rajesh Prasad is stress of non-payment of pension
 Procedure

After the Application is being filed to Chhattisgarh human rights commission

and other department regarding the same; information was sent to secretary, C.G
Govt. Higher education by Chhattisgarh human rights commission. On 8/6/16
information regarding the same Letter sent to higher education was given to
munnibai on the same date by Chhattisgarh human rights commission,

On 16/8/26 letter was sent to Munnibai by CGHRC. The copy application of

Director & higher education. On 5/9/16, letter was received to CHRC, by
munnibai, regarding the complaint and Info that till that date payment of pension
has not been received by in the university and they stopping the payment on
purpose.

The same letter was sent to Registrar, Ghasidas University, on 21/9116. On

27/10/16, u/s 13(2) of Protection of human rights act, 1993, Letter was sent by
CGHRC, to Dr. N.suryanayam special duty officer, Mantrayala regarding the
same matterDr. N.S.Surygranyan was present at the comm... Letter to Registrar,
Ghasidas University was sent by director of higher education regarding
incomplete information. On behalf of Registrar of ghasidas university B.N tiwari,
H.N. choubey Joint Registrar was present under the notice sent to him 13 (2) of
protection of Human Rights act

Judgement

The joint Registrar told that Munni bai is receiving pension. According to the
decision of the executive council of the University the Applicant's husband
pension. Investigation has been done regarding the same.
 CASE NO.3

Registration Date - 16/21/16 Case no -212/2016/DRG/HDC

District- Durg

Classification - Complaint related to health department (HDC)

Applicant’s Name - Aanand Rao L. Ramteke

NonApplicant name - Cheif Medical and Health Officer (presently) "then"

Mr.Tiwari

Subject-Complaint Regarding corrupt B.M.O

Facts

A complaint has been made before the the commission by the Applicant Anand
Rao Ramteke that his wife Asha Devghade was posted in dundilohra C.H.C of
female medical officer Durg Balod. CMO Tiwan, BMO devdas and other used to
torture her due to which her health. derrioted and she died. The remaining salary
and pension benefits of the applicant wife have not been received till that date.

Procedure-

Inquiry was done by authorities on the advice of the commission.

 Judgement-

In relation to the complaint letter, the inquiry report was called, according to
which Mrs. Dr.smit Asha Ramteke medical officer, community health center,
dundilohra, After the death, Exgrasia, GIS, GPF and all Final payment were paid,
And is written and recorded the same. The application for compassionate
appointment has been rejected as it was submitted after. Three months after death.
Die to non-presentation of kind any of travel bill, medical reimbursement bill by
the complainant it has been mentioned that it is not possible to pay. On the inquiry
report being called from complainant, it is said that false report has been
submitted.

The complaint Letter submitted by the Complainant is unclear. Before the death
the wife of the complainant was suffering from mental illness / disability, there is
no document in this regard also. In the Complaint letter and note and in the
evidence presented before the commission, the complainant has not presented any

Acknowledgement of payment of any kind due to which there is no outstanding

balance of payment shown. Hence the Complaint letter is dismissed.
 CASE NO.4

Registration Date - 11/10/2017 Case NO-1174/2017/RYP/PCD.

District- Raipur

Classification - death in police custody (PCD)

Applicant's Name - Sanibai

Non-Applicants Name - Station Incharge

Subject -custodial death of shabbir, and burned the body under pressure without
informing family or mother, needs appropriate action in relation to same

Facts

In her Application by the apppplicant sannibai it has been told that in Dec 2016,
some policeman from Korba came to her house et 2'0 'clock in the night and took
her son and while interrogating, Killed her son and told that he died of disease
they are making a false case saying of what happened. The cremation of shabbir
(her son) was also done forcibly by the police, due to which aggrieved applicant
has requested to take action against the guilty police officer by presenting the
Applicant letter before the commission.

In her application, the Applicant has accused the police of causing death of her
son in police custody. In such a situation it was proposed to summon the
superintendent of police, Korba, as well as summon the Autopsy report from the
collector, Korba.
 Procedure-

In an application dated 09/02/17 by Superintendant of police, korba to Inspector

general of police, it was that shabbir was arrested in month of 2016 by CIT (crime
branch) korba on information that Shabbir and some others are involved in case
of theft. While he was in custody of police and investigation was going on the
shabbir's health became bad and due to that he died. Alot of things were found at
his place, which are of theft.

On 4.6.2019 a letter from the office of superintendent korba has been sent to
address Director General of Police Atalnagar, stating, that shabhir died on 24.12.
16 due to custodial death. He stated that a judicial inquiry has been conducted
into the matter and was found that 8 [constable & In charge) were found guilty
Guilty of death of above deceased in police custody and has been recommended
a judicial inquiry report so Institute sections 304, 34 of IPC and against them and
got the investigation done.

On 27/12/19 a letter by office of collector Korba has been sent to law offices for
inquiry.

On 22/5/20 a letter of CGHRC to director General of police was sent informing

that on inquiry by the commission it was found wual shabbir died in police
custody, asking why he should not be compensated. When died in custodial death,

On 1/6/20 a letter by police headquaters CG was received to CGHRC, informing

about custodial death of shabbir and his report.

On 19/10/20, & letter by CGHRC was sent to Director general of police, that it is
expected from the state govt (Home department) that why should not the deceased
should be compensated and has asked to represent their side.
 Judgement-

On 19/7/21, a letter by ministry of home affairs has sent to collector and district
magistrate.stating the order to pay Rs 3 lakh under the CGHRC case application
to the family of the deceased. It is given under social securing &welfare and
victim compensation.
 CASE NO.5

Case No - 273/33/12/2019

Classification-Pension Related matter (PC)

Applicant's Name - Rajesh Kumar Pradhan

Non Applicant’s Name- education department.

Subject - Pension related matter

Facts-

An Applicantion Addressed to the commission has been Submitted by the

appicant Rajesh Kumar Pradhan and other applicants to the affect that his father
Late Nathulal Pradhan was appointed on. 7.7.1962 in govt. Primary School,
Deori, Block Basna, district Mahasamund. His father was suspended on
08.09.1975 and died in 13.08.2000 - After the death of the father his dependents
were only given 962878/ - where as they are entitled to recieve the interest and
compensation amount of 30 lakhs for the amount of the deceased at the age of 31
years therefore, the Applicants have expected action from the commission.

Procedure-

Report from secretary school education department has not been recieved
Therefar notice is issued u/s 13(2) Human Rights Protection Act, 1993.
 Judgement-

Appearing before the commission, the applicant has told in his evidence that after
five years of his father's death, the department has paid the subsistence allowance,
provident fund amount and other title funds. The said amount is given on the basis
of minimum wage. The applicant has also stated that after 31 years of the
suspension period of the father, the subsistence allowance and other amount has
been given, in which case the interest should be compensated. The applicant has
stated that the payment of the said title should be done on the initiative of the
commission.

The applicant in his reply before the Commission has written that according to
the order of the C.G.Government, the self. After the death of Nathulal Pardhan
Assistant Teacher, after the last 35 years, according to the date 24.04.2012 of the
Block Education Officer Basna, the total amount paid mentioned has been given
about Rs. 9,62,878/from his suspension period. The interest amount and special
compensation amount at least 30,00,000/-will be taken care of keeping in view
the above mentioned difficulties.

The applicant himself the payment of the outstanding title of Nathulal Pardhan is
said to have been received. No action can be taken by this Commission in respect
of compensation. The applicant is free to take separate legal action

For compensation. Therefore, the proceedings in the case are terminated after the
payment of title is made.
 CASE NO.6

Registration date-8/1/16 Case No.-34/2016/RYP/PAC

District - Raipur

Classification - Police Atrocities (PAC)

Applicant's Name - Subash sahare

Non-Applicant's Name- Kailash Dubey

Subject- To Report the unreasonable act of police, entered the house and beaten
and cursed for no reason on 30.12.15., at around 9:00 pm to 10pm.

Facts-

A Complaint has been filed before the commission by the Applicant Subash
sahare that on 30-12-15 at golbazar he was beaten by policemen and it was said
that T.I sir has been called he was made to sit in the Police jail and after that was
released. The accused pelice personnel have been named as Bhaskar and Kallash
Dubey by the Applicant.

The complaint of the applicant is against the act of public servant. Therefore, it is
proposed to call a report by sending a copy of the complaint to the Supreintendent
of police, Raipur.
 Procedure followed and Recommendation by the commission-

It is clear from the statement of applicant and medical report that the Applicant
was assaulted on 2.1.16 an order has been issued by the S.P; Raipur, in which
the principle constable Kallash, Jeetendra Dubey, Constable Bhaskar and
Constable Himanshu Rathore were suspended after finding prima facie Guilty
on the complaint of misbehavior with Complainant. A show cause notice was
issued for withholding of one year increment of the Non-Applicant with Non-
cumulative effect.

It is clearly established from the material and evidence available on the record
that the Applicant was assaulted and misbehaved by the personnel of the police
station, Golbazar. Principle Constable kailash Dubey, Jitendra Bhaskar and
constable. Himashu Rathore.

Thus the act done by said police personnel is clearly a violation of the human
right of the Applicant. In such a situation it seems appropriate to get
compensation from State govt to the Applicant.

Therefore, the commission recommends to the state government that

Rs. 25000/ - should be paid a as compensation to the Applicant within two
months.
 CASE NO.7

Registration Date-13/07/05 Case No.-RYP/375/05/JDC

District-Raipur

Classification-Custodial death in Jail (JDC)

Applicant's name- Additional District Magistrate, Raipur

Non-applicant's name-Jail Superintendent, Rajnandgaon

Subject- Death of accused prisoner no.1689 swaminath

Facts:

The accused prisoner was suffering from absurd hernia. And was taken to dr.
ambedkar medical college hospital for operation on 23.06. 05 and was
discharged on 29.06.05 and was taken back to the jail. On 4.07.05 at 7:30 AM
the accused prisoner was found in very chronic state. When he was admitted to
the hospital again, he was found dead on 05.07.05 at 5 AM.

Procedure-

Application of acknowledgement received by Chhattisgarh human rights

commission on 5.8.05.Letter to the superintendent of police, NHRC for approval
for investigation on 27.08.05 District magistrate, Raipur sent the investigation
approval and received by the joint secretary.

Information received from web-site of NHRC for perusal.

• According to sec 36 of human rights protection act, 1993 the case filed in
Chhattisgarh human rights commission, the NHRC has to close the case inquiry.
 Judgement-

In the reports after investigation, it was concluded that there was high negligence
on the part of the hospital procedure. The patient was discharged even after he
was not fully recovered and due to un-sterilised operation equipment the patient
was caused with infections and pus.

The human rights of the deceased were violated by both the jail authority and

The hospital due to their negligence. Hence, the central government is

recommended to pay the family of the deceased with a compensation of Rs.1
lakh. The central government can further obtain the sum of money from the
hospital and the jail
 CASE N0.8

Registration Date - 22/1/14 Case No.-DTW / 1/2014/WAC

District- Dantewada

Classification- Atrocities Against women (WAC)

Applicant's Name – Smt. Manju Srivastava Assistant District Prosecution

officer

Non Applicant's Name- Rakesh singh, Deputy Director Incharge

Subject - Against Rakesh singh, Deputy Director Incharge for Indecent behavior
and mental and physical harassment

Facts

The Applicant smt. Manju Srivastava, Assistant District public prosecution

officer, Bacheli, District Dantewada has complained of constant physical and
mental harassment by the Deputy Director - in charge prosecution Shri Rakesh
singh, According to the Applicant, being alone in the office on 21/11/2011, he
made abusive and obscene talk and used criminal force. After complaining to the
higher officials, she was transferred to bacheli. The Applicant has alleged that the
Appellant still behaves in an indecent manner on going to dantewada office and
pressurizes her to have immoral relationship. The Applicant has also alleged that
she has been threatened to spoil its CR.,therefore, the Appellant has presented the
present complaint to take action against the Appellant.
 Procedure-

Investigation was done and relevant sections of sexual Harassment of women at

workplace (Prevention, prohibition and Redressal) was invoked accordingly
.cross examination was not demanded but Section 11 (1) section 11(3), sectionl14
of the Act, 2013, and rule 7,10 of the said rule 2013 was invoked. Internal
complaints committee was formed on the basis of seniority.

Judgement -

The charge sheet has been issued by the department against the appellant Rakesh
singh and departmental inquiry is being conducted.

Therefore as a result of the department taking action on the complaint Against the
Appellant, the complaint is disposed off by accepting the report submitted by the
deputy director public prosecution.
 CASE NO.9

Registration Date - 24/7|/09 Case NO - BUR/09/2009/MC

District - Surajpur

Classification- Misc. complaint (MC)

Applicant’s Name - Mohd. Makbul Khan (sub inspector)

Non-Applicant's Name-Mr. H.L. Nayak Additional Collector

Subject-inquiry for abusing the applicant and violating human rights and
Commenting on police department by Mr. Nayak ( Appellant)

Facts

The complaint has been addressed to the commission, in which complainant who
is a police inspector, has complained against the Additional collector M. L Naik,
Ambikapur that on 21/7/09 at 6' 0 clock in the village. Bhadhwahi, he abused him
and commented on police department, violating his human right. It is proposed
to settle the matter by C.G Government by sending the complaint to the secretary
of home department for action at their level.
 Procedure followed and Recommendation by the commission-

Even after being given an opportunity to support his case, the Applicant had not
got any other witnesses examined. Appellant on his behalf witness Awadh singh
Rana, udaipur and M.M Ratre Tehsildar Chief Executive officer, Jampad
Panchayat has been tested, these two were present at the scene incident their
statements are important as they were present there not only this but they are
responsible government officials, looking at the evidence of these witnesses it
was found that he was not humiliated or annoyed the non-appplicant by using
abusive word (by the non-Applicant) the Awadh singh Rana in his statement said
that the Additional Collector has asked why the receipt(acknowledgement) is not
been given. Acknowledgement is given at the behest of Thanedar and he can give
example also. He also said there was no abuse between the Additional collector
and the Thanedar, when the people present asked the Additional collector to ask
Thanedar to inquire and take action then the crowd clapped, and the same
statement was made by Mr. Ratre

- In the same line C.G, the letter of the govt. Home (Police) department is also
worth recalling According to which the police Headquarters has asked Maqbool
(given) necessary directions and no attempt to humiliate has been found.

From the Above analysis of all the evidence Presented in the case, it is concluded
that the Responder H.L. -Nayak, there was no violation of human rights
established by way of abuse towards Maqbool Khan (Applicant)
 CASE NO.10

Registration Date - 30/5/16 Case No-664/2016/ MLI/ NHRC.

District- Mungeli

Classification - Case received from National Human Rights Commission.

Applicant’s Name - Ishwar Miri

Non Applicant’s Name - S.K. Dubey, subinspector

Subject- The Applicant complained to the higher authorities against S.K. dubey
for the purpose of getting justice and against registration of offenses by sub
inspector again and again by fabricated false evidence and for taking heavy on
RTI.

Facts

Petitioner Mr. Ishwar Miri on 19/8/15 went to Mungeri Police station to get bail
Of his brother. Petitioner has alleged S.K dubey, S. I Pramod Dadsena and other
police officials has beaten him. They beated him so badly that he got his ear
severely injured and got many other minor body injury.

In addition to this cruelty, they also illegally detained him by was saying
complaining against police & seeking info as per RTI rules.

Police has registered complaint against as per arrested him as per sec
151,107,116(3) and arrested him on 20/8/15.

Petitioner has also complaint about the cruelty by police to P.A. He has attached
report of District hospital bilaspur, But no investigation was done in the this case
on the basis of statement of higher police official without taking the statement of
petitioner, one sided investigation report was made.

Therefore petitioner had approached NHRC in respect to the misbehavior of

police officials. Police has not done anything in this regard.
NHRC after perusing through complaint has found that this matter is subject to
state and transferred to Act, 1793, with the CG HRC under section 13(6) of
Act1993, for disposal in accordance provisions Of Act.

Procedure-

Since the complaint of Mr. Ishwari was related with police cruelty and violence
and is against public servant. Therefore Commission has sent the copy of
Complaint to Superintendent of police,Mungeli. The Superintendent of Police
didn't respond so as per sec 13 (2) of act, commission served him with a notice.
After getting the notice, the SDOP Mungeli Mr. O.P chandel presented before the
commission on the behalf of PA Mungeli Smt. Nitu kamal.

He has submitted that in the investigation it was discovered that there was no case
of atrocities by the police. Since there was already existing Case against petitioner
& his brother, therefore they falsely accused police of cruelty.

This report of police was sent to petitioner.He has submitted some document upon
seeing that commission has decided to record his statement.

On the basis his statement ,commission has served under section 6 to the notice
to present sub inspector S.K Dubey,ASI Pramod Dadsena,Chief Constable
Krishna Tandon, constable M.K kuree and constable Lokesh Singh All of them
has submitted there replies.

Tandon has submitted that he went to Kashi Village for investigation with
team,but accused Mr. Mahesh Miri was not helping in inquiry,instead he started
abusing them therefore they took him to Police station.

After that petitioner arrived to police station and demanded to leave his brother
and started abusing by saying he is Worker of BSP.

On that preventive action was taken.

 Judgement

It is evident the evidences and statements of petitioner that he has made complaint
to IG and higher police authority, it was stated that Petitioner has submitted
application to do medical checkup after the police cruelty incident, in the District
hospital Bilaspur on 21/8/15. In the medical report produced it was clearly stated
injuries in knee & elbows and ear. Further medical checkup report by hospital of
bilaspur has stated Normal ear injuries.

“Every prisoner should be medically examined before he is admitted to the jail"

But there by Police was no such report produced by police.

It is evident from the evidences submitted after getting bail petitioner has
complaint to higher police authority upon that on 21/08/15 medical checkup was
done. This incident was of 19/08/15 and next day on 20/08/15 he was produced
in collector’s court.

It can be inferred that, petitioner has immediately informed about police torture
to higher authority .Petitioner has mentioned about injuries that is justified by
medical report and petitioner from 19/8/15 to 20/8/15 was in custody of police

Therefore it can be clearly observed that there was atrocities with him in police
custody. Petitioner suffered from injuries. Therefore to Commission opines to
give Rs.25000/- as compensation to petitioner under 2 months.