NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, INDIA Chenthitta Temple and fell down and sustained injuries. The police reached the spot and brought Binu to Police Station Thampanoor. At the police station Binu felt giddiness and showed symptoms of fits. He was immediately taken to General Hospital where the doctor declared him brought dead. ii. The Commission on 07.08.2015 took cognizance of the intimation and called for reports from concerned authorities. iii. The post mortem report of the deceased mentioned the cause of death due to occlusive coronary artery disease. The injury noted on the head could have accelerated the disease and precipitated death. iv. Initially, the magisterial enquiry of the incident was conducted by Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Thiruvananthapuram. He held that as the relatives of the deceased expressed suspicion on his death, he was of the view that to determine whether there is any truth in the allegations of the relatives of the deceased, a detailed enquiry is required in the matter by a Judicial Magistrate. v. Subsequently, a detailed enquiry was conducted by Judicial Magistrate First Class-III, Thiruvananthapuram. During the course of enquiry, the Magistrate recorded the statement of the Autopsy Surgeon and other witnesses. The relatives of the deceased were, however, not examined by the Magistrate. On examination of the statement of witnesses and other evidence, the Magistrate concluded that none of the witnesses stated that they saw deceased Binu falling on the ground or anybody beating him. The Magistrate also could not establish as to how the deceased sustained the injuries and held that he died as a result of the reasons mentioned in the post mortem report. vi. Upon consideration of the above facts and circumstances as revealed in the reports received from the authorities concerned, the Commission vide proceedings dated 12.09.2018 observed and directed as under: “Commission has carefully considered the materials on record. It has been stated by the police that one Ravi was pick pocketed [pickpocketed] by the deceased but he was not examined in the magisterial enquiry. The family members of the deceased, who raised doubt about the death of [the] deceased in the first magisterial enquiry were not examined by the Magistrate in the second magisterial enquiry. The post mortem report of the deceased indicated a contusion on left side of back of head and an abrasion on left leg knee, which are improbable together in a fall from the wall. The police has also not registered any case on the statement of Shri Ravi that he was robbed off Rs.1600/- by the deceased. No independent witnesses deposed before the Magistrate that they have seen the deceased being manhandled by [the] public who caught him. Even if we believe that the deceased was in a serious injured condition especially with head injury, when the police took him in their custody, he should have been taken to hospital first for giving prompt medical treatment 52 ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20