CHAPTER SIX
PUNJAB STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
- A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
The human rights situation in Punjab is no better than in other
parts of the country. Succumbing to public demand, the State Government
constituted the Punjab State Human Rights Commission with its
headquarters at Chandigarh in May 1997. Justice Vinay Kumar Khanna,
a former Chief Justice of Guwahati High Court, was appointed its
Chairperson. Justice J.S.Sekhon, a former High Court judge, T.S.Cheema,
M.S.Chahal and Maninder K.Mattewal, were appointed its members
for a term of five years. Incidentally, none of the appointees
had any previous record in the field. These appointments made
purely on political considerations, baffled many human rights
activists and serious doubts were being raised on the integrity
and credibility of the members. The five members of the Commission,
without any humanist approach were given the onerous task of promoting
and protecting the human rights of the subjects, making a mockery
of the institution. The staff of the investigation wing of the
Commission is from the State police. One Additional Director-General
of Police, with a battery of Police inspectors as investigators
have been provided to assist the Commission. An annual fund of
Rs. 3 crore earmarked for the Commission with Rs.20,000/- being
spent monthly on each member of the Commission, it has become
a white elephant for the State government .
Without much fanfare, the Commission, started its functioning
in July, 1997. In the hope of getting some relief to the still
unhealed wounds , the people welcomed the Constitution of the
Commission. Various Human Rights organizations addressed complaints
and representations to the Commission airing their views about
the wrong done to the people, and advised it to restore the faith
of the people through its transparent working and unimpeachable
integrity, so that it may bring a deterrent effect on the State
Police and no policeman could dare to take the Law into his hand.
In its utterances and promises at public platform, the members
of the Commission did speak of rendering speedy and effective
justice, but in practice they behave so arrogantly and with hostility
that the purpose of its constitution has been miserably defeated.
Anticipating trouble in opening the floodgates of litigation against
Punjab police, the Commission in no equivocal terms drew the attention
of all concerned to their limitation under Section 36(ii) of the
Protection of Human Rights Act,1993 which bars the jurisdiction
of the Commission inquiring into any matter after the expiry of
one year from the date on which the act constituting violation
of human rights is alleged to have been committed. It was also
made known that the Commission does not have any authority or
power to make any order to the State Government or State Police.
At the most, it could simply make a recommendation to the State
Government but such recommendat-ion would not be binding on the
State Government. But inspite of this meaningless jurisdiction,
the Commission speaks of rendering speedy, inexpensive and effective
redressal to the victims.
Although the Constitution of the Commission could not fulfill
the election manifesto of Shromani Akali Dal made during elections
in 1997 because the Commission lacks jurisdiction to look into
one year old complaint of human right violation, whereas hundreds
and thousands of complaints relate to the period 1979-1997. Still
the people hoped that the Commission would serve the purpose of
atleast preventing further abuse of their human rights. They had
been pleading in vain to the State Government to help them in
the continuing transgression of their fundamental rights by the
Punjab Police. Famous poet Qateel Shifai, aptly described the
state of their mind in his words, -
Manzil na de Chirag na de, Honsla to de,
Tinke ka hi Sahi tun , magar asra to de.
(Don't lead me to destination, neither the light,
but give some courage, may it be a small grassroot,
but do give some support)
As the wise saying goes, our character is the result of our conduct.
During the past three years of working, the Commission received
about 5000 complaints of human rights violations in the State.
In almost all complaints filed before the Commission, allegations
of illegal detentions, custodial deaths, Police highhandedness,
land grabbing by policemen and interference of Police in civil
disputes were highlighted. Out of these, majority of the complaints
were simply dismissed in favor of Police officials on one or the
other technical grounds, such as non-prosecution of complaint,
matter being sub-judice in a court of law or pendency of departmental
inquiry against the police official. Ironically, there had been
at least twenty six custodial deaths in the State during the last
three years. Not even in a single case, the Commission was able
to heal the wound of the victims' family and failed to render
effective redressal to the kith and kin of the victims. Rather
few social organizations which took up the matter before the Commission
on the basis of newspaper reports were called upon to prove their
locus standi as the Protection of Human Rights Act,1993 does not
provide for the filing of a Public Interest Litigation.
In 1998 alone, out of 2000 odd complaints received by the Commission,
more than fifteen complaints related to Custodial deaths, hundred
more to illegal detention of women and stripping in the Police
Stations, illegal detention of old people in connection with land
disputes, and other cases of Police highhandedness. Unfortunately,
the lackasidiscal approach of the Commission towards the continuing
human rights violations in the State, brought home the message
that the Commission is more interested in paper work, than in
rendering speedy and effective justice. Police officials were
seldom called by the Commission and in few cases where the Police
Inspector or a Deputy Suprintendent of Police was summoned by
the Commission, due regard was given to his position. Not many
inquiries, into various complaints were marked by the Commission.
Every inquiry was conducted by the Police Inspectors of Punjab
police. Expectedly, the inquiry gives clean chit to the erring
cops. One cannot loose sight of the fact that for reasons best
known to it, the Commission did not make any recommendation to
the State for initiation of criminal proceedings in the court
against even a single police official inspite of finding prima
facie evidence. There are more than one example to support this
statement. Naturally, people got the message that the Commission
has a soft corner for the police officials and it is too reluctant
to take any action against them, whatever heinous crime they had
committed. Many village folk even expressed their anguish at this
indifferent attitude of the Commission by raising slogans and
crying loud and high in the well of the retiring room turned court
of the chairperson and members. Any compensation, if at all awarded,
was recommended to be paid from the State Exchequer without punishing
the guilty police officials with exemplary punishment. The net
result of this undue favor was that officers like Inspector Budh
Singh of CIA staff Bhatinda and Sub-Inspector Balwant Singh Majitha,
SHO of P.S. Central, SAS Nagar, Mohali are still continuing with
their criminal activities unabated inspite of being indicted by
the Commission more than twice. Budh Singh was held guilty of
stripping and torturing an old widow Amarjit Kaur and her son
Navdesh Kumar in August, 1997 and he has now recently been booked
for the third time for serious offences under IPC. S.I. Balwant
Singh Majitha was indicted for his highhandedness with a religious
preacher of Phase IX, SAS Nagar, Mohali in June, 1998 and was
ordered to be transferred outside Distt.Ropar. But inspite of
best efforts of the commission, he remained posted at the same
Police Station for many months and is at present promoted to a
nearby police station.
During the same time, the Commission started deputing its members
to visit different jails in the State to have first hand account
of the conditions of inmates lodged therein. But interestingly,
as the Chairman of the Commission puts, the Commission lacks jurisdiction
to enter a jail without intimation to the State government and
know the ground realities inside the jails and real conditions
under which the inmates live. In compliance of the provisions
of the Protection of Human Rights Act, the Commission gives a
week's prior notice to the jail Suprintendent and the District
Magistrate concerned and on the day of inspection they visit the
jail alongwith the jail Suprintendent or the District Magistrate
concerned. It goes without saying that their inspection to the
jail proved to be more of a show-off than achieving any fruitful
result except making a heavy bill of out-station conveyance charges.
When queried from the Chairman of the Commission, whether he has
tasted the unbaked and unhygienic food served to the prisoners
daily, he said they are aware of it but find themselves helpless.
The Commission also finds itself in a quandary when asked as to
whether it had sought amendments in the Act enabling them to visit
the jails without information to the jail authorities and order
for better living conditions to the prisoners. Horrors of the
horror, even after more than twenty five inspections to different
jails in the State, the Commission is unable to improve jail conditions
and force the State Government to take effective steps to prevent
the overcrowding of all jails in the State. According to a Civil
Writ Petition filed in the Punjab & Haryana High Court by
an N.G.O. almost every jail in the State, houses more than double
the number of prisoners permitted to be kept in the jail manual.
But the Commission has failed to do justice to those poor and
indigent prisoners whose voice remains in the stone walls of inhuman
jail conditions. The plight of the common man, whose fundamental
rights are being transgressed every day by the devils in uniform
does not disturb the Commission at all. Allegations of favoritism
to the police force by the Commission are too serious to be ignored.
There is sufficient evidence on record to say that the scales
of justice are deliberately weighed in favor of the police officials,
who can afford the best lawyer and influence the members of the
Commission, whereas the victims may be deprived of their rights
guaranteed under the Constitution. The situation has undoubtedly
put the protectors of human rights in a bind.
Many non-governmental human rights organizations working for the
cause have filed more than a hundred complaints relating to custodial
deaths, rape in police custody, custodial torture and other custodial
crimes committed upon the citizens by the Punjab police. Prominent
among these organizations were Lawyers For Human Rights International,
Lawyers For Social Reforms, Punjab Human Rights Organisation,
World human rights protection council and few others, besides
thousands of victims of human rights violations. Lawyers For Human
Rights International have filed more than twenty five complaints
on the basis of newspaper reports during 1997-98, but the commission
did not respond appropriately. The ultimate result was that cases
of human rights violations continued in the State (for details
see appendix - II).
DECISIONS :-
After stretching the complaint for more than a year or so, the
Commission usually dismisses it on the ground of non-prosecution
of the case. In case where the complainants persued the complaint
vigorously, long and unnecessary adjournments were granted to
the State for filing their reply. Interestingly the police official
against whom allegations of human violations were made were never
summoned by the commission. Even in the cases of heinous crime
of custodial death, while the State police forthwith supply a
copy of the video film of the postmortem along with inquest report,
the Commission takes the case very leniently. It does not view
the video film of postmortem of a custodial death, to get to the
truth. The request of the complainants for inspection of the video
film is cold bloodily turned down. In every case of death of an
undertrial in jail, the State comes with the pet story that the
deceased was suffering from mental depression and in a fit of
frustration he committed suicide by hanging himself in the cell.
In many cases, where allegations of death in Police custody are
well founded, the State pleads innocence on the ground that the
deceased fearing action by the police in a complaint of theft
against him, committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance
placed in the police station or the place of detention. In few
other cases, the Punjab police comes with the duly sworn affidavits
and statements of the relatives of the victims or fabricated witnesses
expressing their desire to withdraw the complaint before the Commission.
But the malady of the situation arouses when the Commission dismisses
the complaints blaming lack of material evidence on record, inspite
of finding a prima facie case of death due to Police torture.
Under these circumstances, there seems no room to hope of getting
justice from the Commission.
A complaint filed by an N.G.O. Lawyers For Social Reforms relating
to the custodial death of Sham Lal of Village Ajnali, Distt.Fatehgarh
Sahib on 5th September, 1997, was dismissed on October 1, 1999.
The Commission held that -
" ....Consequently there is no option but to conclude that
the victim had suffered these injuries obviously either at the
hands of the Police officials or at the hands of the P.S.E.B.
employees. The factum that the entire village blocked the traffic
along the G.T.Road and insisted on the registration of a case
against the officials at fault also spells about the truthfulness
of this conclusion as the spontaneous reaction in a particular
situation is the best yardstick with the judicial forum to appraise
the direct evidence.
......It is unfortunate that even after the dawn of Independence
about half a century back, the basic character of the nation has
not emerged as even the relations of the deceased have wilted
under the pressure of the police. To crown it all, it is noticed
by the Commission in all the cases of custodial deaths or torture
or rape that the senior officers of the police force manning the
districts are prone to give shelter to the misdeeds of their subordinates
for the reasons best known to them. The matter does not rest here
as even the medical officers posted in the districts are also
amenable to the influence of the police. Although the medical
evidence and other circumstances discussed above do make out a
case that the victim had suffered injuries either at the hands
of the police officials or at the hands of the P.S.E.B. employees
or both, yet due to lack of evidence it is difficult to pin down
the liability of the actual culprits or offenders. It being a
case of sudden reaction to the situation by the said officials
during the performance of their duties, the provisions of Section
34 IPC are of no help to them. Under these circumstances, the
commission is not in a position to even award interim compensation
to the dependents of the deceased as it is difficult to hold as
to whether the P.S.E.B. or the State Govt. would be liable to
pay such compensation. Moreover, the provisions of Sub-Section(3)
of Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 are
meant for granting immediate interim relief to the victim or the
members of his family obviously in those cases where the dependents
of the family of the victims come forth to justify the making
of such recommendation on the basis of their financial position
and total dependency on the income of the victim. Thus in view
of the above referred circumstances, no action is called for by
the Commission in this matter."
Another case of Custodial death of Jagan Nath alias Jagnoo, a
poor dalit of Village Pasla, Distt.Jalandhar on 31st August, 1997,
filed on behalf of the victims' family, met the same fate. The
Commission while dismissing the complaint on October 21, 1999
observed that -
"......A perusal of F.I.R. No.53 dated September 3, 1997
got recorded by Mr. Sharad Chohan, SP(City) Jalandhar for offences
under Sections 302/342 IPC regarding the death of Jagan Nath,
reveals that it is primarily based on the injuries found on the
dead body during autopsy. He has also referred to the injuries
on the person of the deceased. In their statements, recorded by
the investigator as well as by Inspector D.K.Dwesar of the Investigation
wing of the Commission, Ranjha Ram, father of the deceased, Ms.Manjit
Kaur, daughter of the deceased and Sant Ram, brother of the deceased
had stated that Jagan Nath suffered from epileptic fits at the
Bus Stand, Goraya. When they were present there, after the compromise
arrived at the Police Station, Goraya, relating to harassment
of the daughter of Sant Ram, and that Jagan Nath had suffered
many falls during the epileptic fit on the metalled road which
resulted in his suffering the injuries and the death. None of
the witnesses has stated that the victim was left by them at the
said Police Station or that his dead body was found there. Under
these circumstances, due to lack of evidence, it cannot be said
that the victim had suffered injuries at the hands of the Police
although the nature and number of injuries found during post-mortem
examination do reveal otherwise that these could not be suffered
by a fall against hard substance/surface during an epileptic fit.
The doctor, who conducted the autopsy however, opined that the
possibility of suffering these injuries due to a fall against
a hard substance couldn't be ruled out. So, there is no option
but to conclude with a heavy heart that due to lack of evidence
it cannot be said that Jagan Nath had died due to police torture,
the commission is not in a position to award any compensation
to the dependents of the deceased especially when they are not
coming forth to claim such compensation. It appears that the parties
have settled the matter privately. The complaint stands dismissed
as such."
On April 22, 2000 an old man Ram Kumar , son of Sadhu Ram of Ludhiana
reportedly died in Police custody in the naka( barrier) on the
Fatehgarh -Sirhind Road in Fatehgarh Sahib. The police alleged
that on being apprehended, the deceased, who was a dreaded criminal
consumed cyanide potassium capsule and died on the way to hospital.
But the version of the Complainant before the Commission was that
the deceased was tortured badly and when his condition became
critical, he was forcefully administered potassium cyanide as
a result of which he died. The Commission while accepting it as
a case of custodial death, rejected the complaint and held that-
"The state of the victim at the time of his apprehension
while accompanying the marriage party of his son can be well imagined
in the background of his being suspected in a heinous crime like
robbery with murder. The testimony of Sonu, son of the victim,
and Mrs. Kaki, the wife of the victim, shows that he was a man
of desperate criminal character who used to indulge in heinous
crimes. Thus, it is plausible that he had kept the cyanide poison
for consumption in such like contingency instead of facing the
harassment of interrogation or the final outcome of the judicial
proceedings. Under these circumstances, the availability of potassium
cyanide and he having consumed it cannot be said to be a suspicious
circumstance as alleged by the learned counsel for the complainant.
Therefore, no case is made out for issuing any direction to the
State government in this matter."
On June 14, 1998 Baljit Kumar a roadside vendor of Patiala was
picked up by a police party in Patiala on a complaint of his neighbour
and taken to the police station where he was subjected to inhuman
torture and when his condition became serious, he was let off.
Succumbing to his injuries, Baljit Kumar died in Civil Hospital,
Patiala on 17th June, 1998. An N.G.O. filed a complaint before
the Punjab State Human Rights Commission seeking a detailed and
independent inquiry into the custodial death of Baljit Kumar.
The Commission after many hearings ultimately came to the conclusion
that -
"After the receipt of report of the Senior Superintendent
of Police, Patiala wherein he had candidly admitted that the injuries
were given to Baljit Kumar deceased by Punjab Home Guards Inderjit
Singh and Bikramjit Singh by means of a rifle butt and a hocky
stick, respectively the Commission decided to summon the widow
of the deceased for recording her statement. But inspite of best
efforts, Mohinder Kaur, the widow of Baljit Kumar has not come
before the Commission. In the face of these facts, the commission
is of the view that further processing of the complaint would
tantamount to flogging a dead horse. In view of the stance adopted
by the widow of the deceased and his other close relatives, the
commission has no option but to accept fait accompli with which
it has been presented by the police. In view of the above discussion,
the complaint does not call for any further action."
The complaint filed by Sher Singh, a religious preacher of SAS
Nagar, Mohali, Distt.Ropar against his illegal detention and harassment
by the Station House Officer of Police Station, Mohali on 13th
April, 1999 was dismissed by the Commission in favour of the Police
officials vide its order dated August 4, 1999. It reads that -
"Admittedly, as per the report of the SSP Ropar, Sher Singh
complainant is in possession of the house in dispute-may be in
his capacity as Sevadar (housekeeper).The civil court having granted
an order of Staus-quo regarding the property in dispute, there
is no question of making any further recommendation to the State
Govt. by the Commission especially when an efficacious remedy
is available to the complainant under Order 39 rule 2-A of the
C.P.C. to file an application before the concerned civil court
regarding the violation of the above referred order of status
quo. Thus the complaint stands finally disposed off as such."
Another complaint filed by Ashok Kumar of Ambdekar Colony, in
village Palsora near Chandigarh in October, 1997 was dismissed
in limine for non-prosecution, alike hundreds of other complaints
on the same ground.
The toothless functioning and favorable attitude of the Commission
towards State agencies have mired its role. Even the State government
is not taking the activities of the Commission seriously. In many
cases where the Commission has ordered the payment of compensation
to the next of kin of those killed in custodial violence, the
State government refuses to comply the orders on one or the other
ground.
In the case of Custodial death of Pala Singh of Village Bhai Bakhtaur
in Bhatinda district on Ist September, 1997, the Commission after
concluding that the deceased consumed poison in police custody
and during interrogation the investigating officer was certainly
negligent in allowing the deceased to pick up the insecticide
in the room where he was detained, held the kin of the deceased
entitled to a compensation of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the State
government within two months, with liberty to recover the same
from the police officials at fault. This order was passed on June
9,1998, but inspite of repeated adjournments granted for complying
with the said order, the Commission ultimately passed the following
order on April 27, 2000:
"It is strange that despite the specific orders dated March
1, 2000 of the Commission that the decision by the High Court
in CRM will have no bearing on the recommendation of the Commission,
as in that petition filed by the brother of the deceased Pala
Singh he had alleged that it was not a case of suicide by the
victim but a murder case, whereas the Commission has awarded compensation
by holding that the concerned police officials of P.S. City Mansa
were negligent in not ensuring the safety of the victim in the
police lock-up as per provisions of the Punjab police rules. Thus,
there is no bar for awarding compensation to the dependants of
the deceased. Thus, the lop-sided attitude adopted by the State
for the payment of petty amount of Rs.50,000/- to the dependants
of the deceased is not appreciated. Therefore, the State government
should apply its mind to the detailed order of the Commission
and release the compensation to the dependants of the deceased
promptly."
Interestingly, even after granting extension of more than six
months to the State by the Commission, the compensation has not
been paid to the dependants of the deceased till date.
In yet another similar case of Custodial death of Milkhi Ram,
son of Piara Ram in Central Jail, Ludhiana on July 24, 1998 for
want of proper medical treatment in jail, the Commission after
prolonged hearings concluded that -
".....the Commission is of the view that there is in fact
no gross negligence indicated on the part of the Superintendent.
Jail and therefore the commission does not recommend any action
against him in this regard. But the doctor is therefore, guilty
of some negligence though not clearly proven to be guilty of any
gross negligence. Action against him by way of his transfer has
already been taken by the department and the Commission recommends
that he should in addition also be warned to be more careful in
future. As regards the compensation for this custodial death,
the Commission is of the view that since no gross negligence on
the part of the authorities has come to light and the deceased
was an old patient of Asthma from which he finally died, a compensation
of Rs.30,000/- would be fair. The compliance be made within thirty
days from the receipt of order."
The said order was passed on June 25, 1999. But the State government
expressed its inability to comply with the said orders and is
delaying the payment of a meagre sum of Rs.30,000/- to the dependants
of the deceased on one or the other flimsy ground.
Devinder Singh alias Bhola, a poor driver of village Hassanpur
in district Ropar died in police custody in October,1998. Three
of his friends were badly tortured in CIA Staff, Ropar on the
suspicion of concealing a gun in the village. The father of the
deceased filed a complaint in the Commission seeking adequate
compensation for the death of his son. The Commission ordered
an interim compensation of Rs. 2 lakh to the father of the deceased
and Rs.30,000/- each to the three persons who were subjected to
torture by the police. Recently a sessions court of Ropar have
convicted four police men for the custodial death of Devinder
Singh and sentenced them to life inprisoment for the dastardly
crime. Awfully the commission did not play any role in ensuring
justice to the victim in this case, expect the grant of above
said compensation.
Tarlok Singh,(37) an undertrial in a murder case lodged in Central
Jail, Gurdaspur died under mysterious circumstances in Central
Jai, Gurdaspur on 27th August,1999. The jail authorities alleged
that he had committed suicide by hanging himself in the cell,
but his wife and other inmates challenged the police version and
alleged foul play into the death. His widow Sukhwinder Kaur with
the assistance of an N.G.O. filed a complaint before the Commission
seeking a detailed inquiry into the custodial death and for adequate
compensation, besides suitable punishment to the guilty jail officials.
In its sixteen page detailed order, the Commission even after
receiving a statement of Nishan Singh, another undertrial lodged
in the next cell of the deceased to the effect that "the
deceased had abused the pharmacist saying that by not providing
him the requisite medicine, he is out to kill him and that on
the night of the incident, the jail pharmacist Harish Chander
had come to the cell of the deceased two or three times and at
about 12 or 1 midnight he heard the shrieks of Tarlok Singh when
the outer door of the cell was opened and Harish Chander pharmacist
indulged in the said act", the Commission did not agree with
the story of killing the deceased in jail custody. The Commission
held that-
" The magisterial inquiry report of Ld. S.D.M. Gurdaspur
reveals that non-compliance of the instructions contained in the
Punjab Jail Manual by the jail authorities had resulted in affording
an opportunity/inducement to the victim to commit suicide. Thus,
this lapse on the part of the authorities had certainly resulted
in affording an opportunity to the victim to commit suicide. To
crown it all, the doctor incharge of the jail hospital has also
not complied with the provisions of Para No.145 of the jail manual
as well as section 29 of the Prisons Act, because he was supposed
to visit the inmate of a cell daily, whereas the S.D.M. Gurdaspur
has rightly found in his report that as per the evidence recorded
by him, the jail doctor used to pay a visit to the cells once
a week.
.....Under these circumstances, there is no escape but to infer
that the above-referred negligence in not inspecting the solitary
cell of the deceased properly by the concerned deputy superintendent
jail and not keeping proper vigil as per the requirement of Prisons
Act and the jail manual, had resulted in the loss of valuable
life of Tarlok Singh and the negligence on the part of these jail
officials cannot be said to be that grave as would fall within
the mischief of Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. However,
it does call for a departmental action against the officials at
fault. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Gurdaspur in his report
has also stated that suitable departmental action is being taken
against the jail officials at fault. Thus, no direction in this
regard is required to be given by the Commission.
.......Keeping in view all these circumstances of the case, this
Division bench of the Commission is of the considered view that
an interim compensation of Rs.2 lakh is required to be recommended
to be paid to the dependants of the deceased.
Inspite of this exoneration of the jail officials from the charge
of causing death by negligence(304-A) and payment of a small sum
of money as interim compensation, the State government refused
to comply with the commission's order on the ground that it would
not be in public interest to comply the orders of the Commission.
This stand was conveyed by the State of Punjab in a writ petition
filed by the widow of the deceased. The High Court strongly rejected
this ground and directed the state to respect the order of the
commission and pay the compensation awarded by it to the widow
of the deceased.
Many human rights activists feel that the poor and hapless litigants
are forced to file petitions in the High Court seeking compliance
of the Commission's order by spending thousands of rupees. They
argue that if they have to ultimately knock the doors of the High
Court, then why to waste time and energy in approaching the Commission.
It would not be unjust to expect that when the commission finds
itself toothless to get its orders complied, it becomes its onerous
duty to approach the High Court and seek the compliance of its
order or tell the State government in unequivocal terms that it
is better to wind up the body and save crores of rupees from going
down the drain annually. But none among the Hon'ble members of
the Commission has time and concern to overcome this impediment.
In the case of Custodial death of Hargobind Singh of Barnala,
on February 7, 2000, the Commission dismissed the complaint observing
that -
" The perusal of the file reveals that this State Commission
had taken cognizance of the matter on receipt of Fax message dated
February 9, 2000 of SSP, Barnala, through IGP Litigation on that
very day i.e. February 9, 2000. But the assistant registrar of
the National Human Rights Commission has informed on July 21,
2000 that the National Commission has taken cognizance of the
Custodial death of Hargobind Singh. Consequently, under the provisions
of proviso (i) to Sub-section (5) of Section 21 of the Act, this
commission is not competent to enquire into this complaint, as
the National Human Rights Commission has already taken cognizance
of the same. Therefore, the complaint stands disposed of as such."
One among the many irregularities in the functioning of the commission,
noticed by many is that while a particular case is heard by a
single member of the Commission holding Court in the retiring
room, the order passed in that complaint at the end of the day
bore the signatures of all the five members, as if all the members
had conducted the proceedings. This practice of obtaining signatures
of other members who had not heard the case is improper and raises
an accusing finger at the working of the commission. Secondly,
the delaying and toothless functioning of the commission makes
it cumbersome like a civil court where nothing except paper transaction
is carried on. Observing a soft heart towards police force, one
could not expect any adverse order against the force from the
Commission, and if at all a daring step is taken, the toothless
procedure and lackadaisical approach of the Commission prevents
justice from being delivered to the victims. One feels perturbed
over the gory incidents of gross violations of human rights committed
by the State agencies occurring every day, but the honorable members
of the Commission do not move a wee bit. It has no regrets for
the kith and kin of hundreds and thousands of victims of human
rights abuses who suffer the wrath of state agencies for being
a believer in rule of law. Dismissing a complaint of custodial
torture having horrible witness account of illegal detention and
beating by the policemen in limine for non-prosecution is palpably
unfair and attracts a violation of human right of the complainant
by the commission itself.
In the infamous case of stripping a poor widow Amarjit Kaur of
Bhatinda in front of her son Navdesh Kumar on August 21, 1997
by Inspector Budh Singh of C.I.A. Staff, Bhatinda, a complaint
was filed before the Commission on behalf of the victim by a social
organization, and the Commission instead of directing stern action
against the erring policemen, reluctantly recommended the State
government to pay a meager sum of Rs.30,000/- to the victim contrary
of categorical direction by the Supreme Court of India that if
any public servant is found guilty of mis-conduct the costs or
compensation so awarded to the victim shall be recovered from
the erring official.
In May,1998 one undertrial Tarlochan Singh, son of Tirath Singh,
lodged in Central Jail, Patiala had made a complaint to the High
Court regarding the illegal racket of sale of medical certificates
in the jail enabling the rich and influential undertrials to "take
rest" in Rajindra Hospital, Patiala for years together and
denial of proper medical aid to the poor prisoners. Specific instances
and documents were supplied by him. On the basis of his revelations,
High Court issued the notice to the Jail Superintendent, Deputy
Superintendent and Medical Superintendent of Central Jail, Patiala.
Firstly, they tried to pressurize the undertrial to withdraw his
complaint, but when he refused to oblige, he was suddenly shifted
to Maximum Security Jail, Nabha on 2nd October,1998 and pressure
was put on him in the Nabha jail also, but when he refused to
budge, on the Diwali night of 19th October,1998, the jail authorities
branded him at his back by writing their respective names with
the help of an hot iron rod. A dirty cloth was put into his mouth
to prevent him from raising cries. After he was medically examined
on the orders of the Judicial Magistrate, Patiala and news reports
being published in all major newspapers of the region, the Commission
took up this case on the complaint of the undertrial. He was ordered
to be produced before the Commission. The erring jail officials
were also given opportunity to put their defence. Tarlochan Singh
produced the affidavits of three eye witnesses, the jail wardens
who were on duty on the ill-fated night who testified that the
above named three officials had branded Tarlochan Singh in their
presence. A hand written confessional statement of Deputy Superintendent
of Central Jail, Patiala, Capt. S.P.Singh admitting a conspiracy
to brand Tarlochan Singh was also filed. Even the Assistant jail
Superintendent of Maximum Security Jail, Nabha where the tragic
incident had happened deposed before the Commission, corroborating
the allegation of branding him by the jail officials of Central
Jail, Patiala. The other side, also filed many documents and statements
of the other inmates and jail wardens contending that he had branded
his back himself in order to take revenge from the jail authorities.
Even after hearing the case for more than two years, the least
the Commission could pass was to order the immediate transfer
of the erring jail officials of Central Jail, Patiala. But the
guilty jail official obtained a stay order from the High Court.
Awfully, the said official who had been proved guilty in the inquiry
by the Commission is still enjoying posting in the same jail,
making the order of the Commission virtually redundant. But the
Commission has failed to award even a paltry compensation for
the sufferings bore by the under trial. The Commission must at
least keep in mind that, he who defends an injury is next to him
that commits it.
The greatest malady that faces the Punjab State Human Rights Commission
today is that human rights have not been understood in its right
meaning and place by the Commission. And this pedestrian mistake
vitiates the whole purpose of the institution and justice remains
a distant dream for the victims. The Judges of the Commission
behave arrogantly and to them every case is an unnecessary burden.
Instead of directing their authority towards the restoration of
faith and confidence in the institution of law in the minds of
the people, it demonstrates their belief in camouflaging opinion
with silky platitudes. As has been noticed by many jurists and
human rights activists who remained associated with the Commission
for past some time, the ways and means adopted by it fell short
of the required zeal in addressing the most piquant question of
nailing the hardened police officials who have the tendency of
acting beyond the pale of law. Often accused of being a soulless,
heartless, mindless and misdirected body, it is reeling under
a grip of legal chaos and jurisprudential failure. Not only the
awareness of the problem but a concerted effort to find the solution
is urgently required.
This long divagation is a backdrop to conclude that the administration
of injustice cannot be sold as administration of justice once
the masses become conscious. The activities of the Commission,
ostensibly framed by the State Government is exposing its hidden
purpose day by day. The Commission with its jaundiced eye is known
more as a forum for tampering justice rather than restoring the
Rule of Law. It might be true that the Commission has succeeded
in its pursuit of pleasing the State government by making undue
favors to the men of their force, but it is also a fact that it
has miserably failed to deliver goods and in the process has evoked
serious allegations of bias, favoritism, arbitrariness and illegality
from all corners.
A few cardinal principles which call for immediate observance
by the commission, to win the confidence of the people and learn
the task of justicing must be practised viz....institutional independence,
individual integrity, management skills, apart from social justice.
It must also bear in mind are that Punjabis have their own scale
of tolerance and one should not stretch it to its last inch. The
distressed people have not been able to come out of the decade
long turmoil even till today, and should not be treated so badly
that may add to their sufferings.
Till then, how so ever loud the Commission beats the drum of human
rights, it cannot remove the stains of browbeating the cause of
human rights and shielding the corrupt and rowdy police officials
involved in heinous crime resulting in gross human rights violations,
lest it re-consider its hidden agenda and adopt a harsh attitude
against the erring officers of State agencies.
Home
HOME 