NHRC reviews human rights situation in States Meeting with all DGs & IGs
The National Human Rights Commission convened a meeting of the Directors General of Police and Inspectors General of Police of all States and Union Territories on 31 July 2000 to review the human rights situation in the various States as well as the functioning of Human Rights Cells established in them. Twenty four States and Union Territories were represented at the meeting. The Special Rapporteurs and Special Representatives of NHRC were also present.
Inaugurating the meeting, Justice J.S. Verma, Chairperson of the Commission emphasised that good and humane governance should be the focus of all.
The Commission, on 2 August 1999, had communicated guidelines to all the States regarding the setting-up and functioning of Human Rights Cells in every State Police Headquarters. This was done to deal with various types of complaints being made against the police regarding human rights violations and also to sensitise them on the issue. The meeting reviewed the impediments being faced in the running of these cells and the suggestions to make them more effective.
On an average, the Commission receives about 100 complaints a day alleging police excesses of various kinds. The Chairperson observed that the reports asked for by the Commission, in respect of such incidents, were frequently much delayed. He called for time-bound action in this regard.
The Chairperson also commented upon the erratic performance of States in regard to the guidelines issued by NHRC, specially in respect of the reporting of custodial deaths/rapes within 24 hours, video-filming of post-mortem examinations in cases of custodial deaths, use of the model autopsy form, the procedures to be followed in case of deaths in police encounters, the observance of NHRC’s guidelines regarding arrest, and measures to be followed to improve police-public relations. Justice Verma stated that failure to observe the guidelines of NHRC on these issues eroded the credibility of the police force and diminished the dignity of the nation. The Chairperson also pointed out that the Commission had been receiving serious complaints of "informal custody", there often being a variation between the reported and actual time of arrest. Analysis of data for the year 1998 received from different States and UTs relating to arrest matters, in response to a study conducted, revealed that the highest number of persons arrested under preventive provisions during 1998 were in Uttar Pradesh (479404) followed by Madhya Pradesh (354242), West Bengal (207625), Gujarat (189722). Figures relating to persons arrested but released without filing a charge-sheet showed that such arrests were highest in Andhra Pradesh (39205), followed by Bihar (33158), Uttar Pradesh (29124), West Bengal (16820), Madhya Pradesh (12399). As regards the percentage of persons arrested in bailable offences, Sikkim topped with 113%, followed by Gujarat (99.75%), Andaman & Nicobar (95.81%), Haryana (94%), Assam ((90%), Daman & Diu (89%), Madhya Pradesh (89%), Karnataka (84.8%) and Kerala (71%). The study also showed that in the category of persons arrested under preventive provisions, but released without filing a charge-sheet, Kerala topped with (77.87%), followed by Manipur (46.63%), Andhra Pradesh (45.66%), Orissa (31.92%), Delhi (22.35%), Mizoram (21.95%), Tripura (20.32%), Nagaland (20.8%) and Arunachal Pradesh (20.5%). When the total number of persons arrested under substantive offences, including those arrested under preventive provisions, were compared with the number of persons released without filing a charge-sheet, Delhi topped (with 92%), followed by Assam (30.3%), West Bengal (23.93%), Manipur (28.81%), Nagaland (15.11%), Tripura (16.17%), Bihar (13.89%) and Andhra Pradesh (11.69%).
The meeting discussed problems faced by the police forces in regard to handcuffing, man-power shortages, political pressures for preventive arrests and the absence of tenures for the DGs and IGs of States. The Commission has asked for specific suggestions on these matters from the senior police officers, which it would then examine, before formulating its own recommendations to the concerned authorities.
Inaugurating the meeting, Justice J.S. Verma, Chairperson of the Commission emphasised that good and humane governance should be the focus of all.
The Commission, on 2 August 1999, had communicated guidelines to all the States regarding the setting-up and functioning of Human Rights Cells in every State Police Headquarters. This was done to deal with various types of complaints being made against the police regarding human rights violations and also to sensitise them on the issue. The meeting reviewed the impediments being faced in the running of these cells and the suggestions to make them more effective.
On an average, the Commission receives about 100 complaints a day alleging police excesses of various kinds. The Chairperson observed that the reports asked for by the Commission, in respect of such incidents, were frequently much delayed. He called for time-bound action in this regard.
The Chairperson also commented upon the erratic performance of States in regard to the guidelines issued by NHRC, specially in respect of the reporting of custodial deaths/rapes within 24 hours, video-filming of post-mortem examinations in cases of custodial deaths, use of the model autopsy form, the procedures to be followed in case of deaths in police encounters, the observance of NHRC’s guidelines regarding arrest, and measures to be followed to improve police-public relations. Justice Verma stated that failure to observe the guidelines of NHRC on these issues eroded the credibility of the police force and diminished the dignity of the nation. The Chairperson also pointed out that the Commission had been receiving serious complaints of "informal custody", there often being a variation between the reported and actual time of arrest. Analysis of data for the year 1998 received from different States and UTs relating to arrest matters, in response to a study conducted, revealed that the highest number of persons arrested under preventive provisions during 1998 were in Uttar Pradesh (479404) followed by Madhya Pradesh (354242), West Bengal (207625), Gujarat (189722). Figures relating to persons arrested but released without filing a charge-sheet showed that such arrests were highest in Andhra Pradesh (39205), followed by Bihar (33158), Uttar Pradesh (29124), West Bengal (16820), Madhya Pradesh (12399). As regards the percentage of persons arrested in bailable offences, Sikkim topped with 113%, followed by Gujarat (99.75%), Andaman & Nicobar (95.81%), Haryana (94%), Assam ((90%), Daman & Diu (89%), Madhya Pradesh (89%), Karnataka (84.8%) and Kerala (71%). The study also showed that in the category of persons arrested under preventive provisions, but released without filing a charge-sheet, Kerala topped with (77.87%), followed by Manipur (46.63%), Andhra Pradesh (45.66%), Orissa (31.92%), Delhi (22.35%), Mizoram (21.95%), Tripura (20.32%), Nagaland (20.8%) and Arunachal Pradesh (20.5%). When the total number of persons arrested under substantive offences, including those arrested under preventive provisions, were compared with the number of persons released without filing a charge-sheet, Delhi topped (with 92%), followed by Assam (30.3%), West Bengal (23.93%), Manipur (28.81%), Nagaland (15.11%), Tripura (16.17%), Bihar (13.89%) and Andhra Pradesh (11.69%).
The meeting discussed problems faced by the police forces in regard to handcuffing, man-power shortages, political pressures for preventive arrests and the absence of tenures for the DGs and IGs of States. The Commission has asked for specific suggestions on these matters from the senior police officers, which it would then examine, before formulating its own recommendations to the concerned authorities.