Complaints before the Coniinission Shri Vy preferred. The expenses of the treatment as well as the travelling expenses of Shri Vij, along with one attendant, from his native place to the place of medical treatment, would also be borne by the State Government. The Commission also directed the prosecution of the police officers found responsible for perpetrating various acts of torture on Shri Vy. As recommended by the State CBCID, disciplinary action is to be taken against five police personnel, including the Senior Superintendent of Police and a Superintendent of Police, Varanasi. The Commission has also issued notice to the concerned doctors from Varanasi asking them as to why recommendations should not be made to the State Government of UP to initiate appropriate disciplinary action against them for giving an incorrect report/findings about the status of health and extent of physical disability and incapability suffered by Shri Rakesh Vij. The Government of UP reported to the Commission its acceptance of the Commission's recommendations with regard to the prosecution of errant police officials, as also in respect of payment of compensation to the victim. COMMENT Under Section 13(1) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the Commission shall, while inquiring into complaints under this Act, have all the powers of a Civil Court trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Section 13(2) further provides that the Commission shall have power to require any person, subject to any privilege which may be claimed by that person under any law for the time being in force, to furnish information on such points or matters as, in the opinion of the Commission, may be useful for, or relevant to, the subject matter of the enquiry and any person so required shall he deemed to be legally bound to furnish such information within the meaning of Sections 176 and 177 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 15 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, protects those who give evidence before the Commission. It also provides for prosecution of those who give false evidence. Medical personnel have a crucial role in unearthing vital evidence in cases of allegations of torture and custodial violence. They have a duty to ensure that an accurate description of the victim's injuries is provided to the Commission. In this case, the medical board constituted by the Government of UP gave a misleading report to the Commission on the extent ofinjuries suffered hy Shri Rakesh Kumar Vij. The Commission, however, got a further assessment made hy the Delhi Trauma and Rehabilitation Centre and then by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). Using the powers conferred on it by its Statute, the Commission, recommended the initiation ofappropriate action against those who tried to mislead it. Article 10(1) of the Convention against Tortine and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment stipulates that each state party shall ensure that education and information regarding the prohibition 107