NHRC takes serious view of non-compliance by Bihar Government in a case of fake encounter

The NHRC has asked the Bihar Government through its Chief Secretary to expedite its compliance of the Commission’s directions in the case of an alleged fake encounter. The Commission concluded that death had occurred in a fake encounter and held that compensation of Rs. 1.00 lakh should be paid to the next-of-kin of the deceased.

The Commission, on 16 March 1999, had received a complaint from Smt. Manva Devi alleging that Assistant Sub Inspector Surender Paswan of Police Station Rivil Ganj, Chapra had dragged her husband, Shri Parsu Ram Nut, out of their home and had shot him dead. She added that the Station House Officer (SHO) at Rivil Ganj Police Station initially did not register her complaint but that the FIR was lodged only on the directions of the Judicial Magistrate of Saran District. The police, she stated, had tried to hush-up the case.

In response to a notice from the Commission, a report was received from the Director General of Police, Bihar. It stated that the Deputy Superintendent of Police of Saran had conducted an investigation. The investigation had indicated that the victim, Parsu Ram, was a dreaded criminal also named Bacha Nut, who was a suspect in 10-12 criminal cases and against whom a case had been registered. It was added that the ASI Surendra Paswan had gone to arrest Parsu Ram under the instructions of the Inspector at the Sadar Police Station. A chase had ensued and Parsu Ram had opened fire. ASI Surender Paswan had then fired in self-defence and Parsu Ram had died in the encounter. It was stated that a country-made pistol and three bullets had been found near the body of the deceased.

The Commission, after considering the reply, came to the view that this was, prime facie, a case of a death in a fake encounter. Further investigation by the Investigation Division of NHRC revealed that the complainant’s husband was a daily labourer who was staying with his family in District Saran (Chapra). He was not named in any of the cases referred to by the Police and there was no merit in the contention of the police that Parsu Ram Nut was indeed Bacha Nut, who was involved in a number of criminal cases. In fact, the newspaper ‘Hindustan’ of 12 June 2000 had indicated that Bacha Nut was active in the area and was still engaged in his criminal activities. Moreover, there were independent witnesses who had seen ASI Surender Paswan dragging the victim out of his house by his collar. The investigation also confirmed that the complaint originally made by the complainant was not entertained by the Police Station and that the investigation supposedly undertaken by the police was shoddy and suffered from a lack of impartiality. Indeed, the police had submitted a final report seeking to close the case.

In these circumstances, the Commission concluded that the State police had tried to hush-up the case and had given a false report. The Commission therefore directed the Director General of Police, Bihar, to ask the Crime Branch/Criminal Investigation Department to conduct a fresh investigation of the case and to submit its report to the CJM. Concluding that this was, prima facie, a case involving a fake encounter, the Commission considered it appropriate to award immediate interim relief to the next-of-kin of the deceased under section 18(3) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. The Commission accordingly, on 10 November 2000, issued a show cause notice to the Government of Bihar asking as to why payment in the amount of Rs. 1 lakh should not be made to the next-of-kin of the deceased.

Despite repeated reminders to the Bihar Government, the Commission has not yet received the requisite compliance report. Taking a serious view of this, the Chief Secretary of Bihar has been asked to look into the matter personally in order to ensure prompt compliance.