NHRC’s persistence results in criminal proceedings against the guilty police personnel and payment of relief to the three victims in a case of false implication and custodial rape in Dist. Balrampur, Uttar Pradesh (05.02.2021)

New Delhi, 5th February, 2021

The persistent follow-up by the National Human Rights Commission, NHRC, India has resulted in filing of charge sheet by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, u/s 376 (2), 506 IPC, against a Sub Inspector in a case of illegal confinement, torture, false implication and custodial rape by him in P.S. Laliya, District Balrampur. In addition to this, departmental action has been taken against the then Additional Superintendent of Police and the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balrampur due to the lack of proper investigation in the matter.

The amount of interim relief Rs. 5 lakh, Rs. 3 lakh and Rs. 1.5 lakh respectively to the three victims, including the woman, her husband and father-in-law, has also paid on the recommendations of the Commission.

The Commission has asked the Chief Secretary and the DGP, Uttar Pradesh to see that the departmental proceedings are concluded against the remaining delinquent police personnel including the supervisory officers in accordance with law expeditiously in case crime number 432/2014, PS Laliya.

During the course of enquiry, the Commission, under its case no. 35244/24/11/2014-AR, had found that a young man and a girl from Balrampur district had eloped and got married in Mumbai in 2014. The girl's father lodged a complaint of kidnapping with the police in the matter, following which, the newlywed couple was called to Mathura police post of Balrampur district.

However, instead of taking a proper legal recourse in the mater, both of them were detained in separate cells at the police post from the 12th - 13th August, 2014. The Sub Inspector subjected the girl to sexual assault. When the girl complained about her sexual assault by the Sub Inspector, no prompt lawful action was taken in the matter.

The police continued to pursue the case of underage marriage of the couple despite a City Court having held both of them of major age and allowed the girl to live with her husband as per her wish. Not only this, the police, subsequently, charged her husband with rape by adding section 376 to the main case file and also falsely implicated her father-in-law. She was also coerced to retract her allegations under pressure of another FIR having been registered on charges of rape against her supporters.

The Commission also found that in response to its notices, the then Superintendent of Police, Balrampur, had failed to give a clear chain of incidents having unity of time, action and place involving the couple's marriage and action taken on another FIR registered by the girl, alleging sexual assault by a Sub Inspector.

*****