Complaints before the Commission
However, if a death is caused in an ecounter that cannot be justified on the ground of
a legitimate exercise of the right to private defence, or in proper exercise of the power
of arrest under Section 46 of Criminal Procedure Code, the police officer causing the
death would be guilty of the offence of culpable homicide. Whether the causing of death
in the encounter in a particular case is Justified, will therefore depend upon the facts
established after a proper investigation.
Deeply concerned by complaints of fake encounters, the Commission laid down the
procedure to be followed in all cases of encounters in its directions on Complaint No.
234 (l-6)/93-94 brought before the Commission by the Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties
Committee. That procedure, which was spelt out in a letter dated 29 March 1997, from
the then Chairperson of the Commission to the Chief Ministers of all the States and
Union Territories, commended the following steps:
□ When the police officer in-charge of a police station receives information about the
deaths in an encounter between the police party and others, he shall enter that
information in the appropriate register.
□ The information as received shall be regarded as sufficient to suspect the commission
of a cognizable offence, and immediate steps should be taken to investigate the
facts and circumstances leading to death to ascertain what, if any, offence was
committed and by whom.
□ As the police officers belonging to the same police station are the members of the
encounter party, it is appropriate that the cases are made over for investigation
to some other independent investigation agency, such as the State CID.
□ The question of granting of compensation to the dependents of the deceased may
be considered in cases ending in conviction, if police officers are prosecoited on the
basis of the results of the investigation.^^,,^
(D) POLICE HARASSMENT
Illegal detention: Uttar Pradesh
(Case No. 15016/24/98-99)
The Commission was seized of a complaint from Ms. Kamini Sharma of Mathura, Uttar
Pradesh, alleging that her father and one of her brothers had been illegally arrested and
detained in custody for a day. These arrests had been made to ascertain the whereabouts
of her brother Kapil, who was a suspect in a murder case.
The Commission called for a report in this matter from the SSP Mathura. The report
stated that the three had been called to the police station, but had been let-off after a
brief interrogation. There had been no illegal detention.
Finding the report unconvincing, the Commission directed the matter to be investigated
by its own investigation division. Tlie report of the investigation team confirmed the
111