NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION must be dealt with by a disciplinary action which was followed in this case. Even though the Superintendent of Police denied the allegation, his pre and post behaviour amply established that the victim was subjected to illegal police action which amounted to a violation of the human rights of the victim. 4.35 In these circumstances, the Chief Secretary, Government of West Bengal was directed by the Commission on 13.07.2016 to show cause u/s 18(a)(i) of the PHR Act, 1993 as to why a monetary compensation of ` 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) should not be recommended to be paid to the victim within six weeks. 4.36 The matter is under consideration of the Commission. 6. Illegal Detention and Torture of Complainant’s Son Rajiv alias Guddu, Resident of Village Yakabgarhi, Dhanaura Police Station, Jyotiba Phule Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, for 8 Days in Police Station (Case No.12111/24/41/2012) 4.37 In this case, the complainant Shri Chandra Pal Singh, son of Duli Singh, resident of Village Yakabgarhi, Dhanaura Police Station, Jyotiba Phule Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, on 25.02.2012 alleged police inaction in regard to the illegal detention and torture of his son Rajiv alias Guddu for eight days in police station and the illegal demand of ` 5,00,000/- for his release. 4.38 A report of the Superintendent of Police, Amroha, was received, according to which it was clear that no plausible explanation was given by the police about the illegal detention of Rajiv. Though, it is established that Rajiv was called at the police station between 17.02.2012 to 29.02.2012, but justification of calling Rajiv was not mentioned in the G.D. The Commission was of the view that it is a case of violation of human rights of victim Rajiv. Accordingly, the Commission directed to issue a notice u/s 18(a)(1) of the PHRA, 1993 to the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh to show cause as to why the victim be not recommended compensation. 4.39 In response, the Joint Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh submitted a report dated 03.03.2016, along with a report of the Superintendent of Police, Amroha dated 09.11.2015, according to which Rajiv was brought to the Police Station from 17.02.2012 to 29.02.2012 for interrogation but no GD entry was made to this effect. On 29.02.2012, the SHO Rajabpur recorded the statement of Rajiv in case Crime No. 62/2012 u/s 302 Police Station Rajabpur, which was mentioned in the GD Entry No. 31. The Investigating Officer found that Shri Suman Kumar, the then SHO Rajabpur, and Head Constable Kamal Naranyan Jha were partially guilty of violating the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in D. K. Basu case. ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 47