Recommendation of Immediate Interim Relief under Human Rights Protection Act is irrespective of litigation

New Delhi, 20 October 2004
The National Human Rights Commission has recommended that the State Government of Gujarat pay a sum of rupees one lakh by way of interim relief to the next of kin of Haji Mohd. Nabuji Tentwala who died while in police custody.
It has observed as legally not tenable the stand taken by the Home Department, Government of Gujarat requesting that the show-cause notice of interim relief recommended by the NHRC may be withdrawn and further action may be considered after the criminal proceedings before the court.
The NHRC was intimated about the death of Haji Mohd. Nabuji Tentwala while in police custody on 12 July 1995 by a communication from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad. It was stated that he was arrested by the police for interrogation in the Gaikwad Haveli Police Station and was brutally beaten, which resulted in his death. The Commission, on 23 January 1996, issued notice to the Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat calling for a report. In response the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad submitted the post-mortem report, inquest report and magisterial inquiry report. The magisterial inquiry report revealed that an inquiry conducted by SDM, Ahmedabad city had found that Mohd. Haji Nabuji Tentwala was brutally beaten by the police, resulting in his death. The report also stated that a SI, ACP and other staff of the police station were responsible for causing his death and cases had been registered against them.
The Commission, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated it to be a case of gross violation of Human Rights and a notice was issued to the Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat to show cause why the Commission should not recommend payment of interim relief under section 18(3) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 to the next of kin of the deceased.
The Secretary (Home), Government of Gujarat in a letter dated 19 June 2004 stated that criminal offences have been registered against the responsible police personnel for beating up the accused and departmental action has also been initiated which are pending final outcome. It acknowledged that human rights violation had taken place and the State Government had taken appropriate action against the accused police personnel concerned. It stated since criminal and departmental proceedings have already been initiated and awaiting final outcome, it requested that the show cause notice for award of interim compensation may be withdrawn and further action may be considered after the outcome of the criminal proceedings pending before the court.
The Commission observed that the response received from the Secretary (Home), Government of Gujarat had acknowledged that human rights violation had taken place. In the face of these facts, the Commission said the stand of the Government of Gujarat becomes logically unacceptable and legally untenable. It also observed that by no stretch of imagination could it be argued that award of 'Immediate interim relief' envisaged in section 18(3) of the Act has to be dependent upon the strict establishment of criminal liability after a full dress court trial. If this view is accepted, the relief will then neither be 'immediate' nor 'interim'. A meaningful and harmonious construction of this clause would leave no doubt that the Commission is entitled to invoke its benevolent sweep on a prima-facie view of the matter irrespective of whether there is any litigation - civil or criminal relating to the matter.
The idea of 'immediate interim relief' does not therefore, presuppose the establishment of criminal liability of the offender in a court of law as a precondition for the grant of the 'relief' nor does it depend on whether any civil litigation is either pending or prospective. A welfare State must recognize its obligation to afford 'relief' to its citizens in distress, particularly those who are victims of violations of their human rights by public servants. The limiting of such statutory relief only to cases in which criminal liability of the offending public servant is established in a Court of law beyond reasonable doubt is it to thwart an otherwise civilized piece of legislation by importing totally irrelevant limitations. The Commission pointed out that the ground urged by the Government in this case, when it has acknowledged by the State itself that there has been violation of human rights of the citizens, is misconceived.
The Commission observed that since the State has failed to show any acceptable, logical or reasonable cause against the recommendation of the Commission made on 5 May 2004 to pay "interim relief" to the next of kin of the deceased, it therefore, recommends to the State that a sum of Rs. 1.00 lakh be paid by way of "interim relief' to the next of kin of the deceased. The compliance report is be submitted to the Commission within four weeks.