Complaints Before the Commission ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 7. Death of Shri Kolumbus in Judical Custody in Uttar Pradesh Case No. 20143/24/ 2002-2003-CD] 4.53 The Commission received an intimation dated 10/9/2002 from the Superintendent, District Jail Lucknow stating that one Shri Kolumbus S/o Sudama, aged 26 years, an undertrial prisoner, allegedly lodged in Session lock up at Lucknow was assaulted with knife and razor allegedly by three co-prisoners in lock up. Kolumbus received serious injuries and was referred to KGMC hospital, Lucknow on 8/9/2002 where he succumbed to his injuries during the course of treatment. 4.54 The Commission obtained a report from the Superintendent, Lucknow Jail which indicated that Kolumbus was injured by his co-prisoner while he was in the session lock up and though no jail officer or staff was responsible for the incident, the injuries were received by Kolumbus due to negligence of the concerned police personnel of the Session’s lock up. The magisterial inquiry report also concluded that the UTP, Kolumbus died due to injuries sustained by him in an attack by his co-prisoners while he was in jail custody in session’s lock up. 4.55 The report further mentioned that a crime No. 365/2002 had been registered against the accused co-prisoner and charge sheet filed against them. 4.56 Upon consideration of the report, the Commission observed as under:4.57 The attack on the UTP Kolumbus by his co-prisoners was with sharp-edged weapons like knife and razor. The co-prisoners had these weapons available to them in the lock-up is a matter of serious concern and discloses lapse on the part of the authorities responsible for maintenance of the lock up. The incident must have taken some time as the deceased suffered multiple injuries as per post-mortem report and during all this period no attempt was made by the police officials in charge of the lock-up to save the deceased from being attacked. This also shows a very callous attitude, and is prima facie evidence of negligence of the concerned police personnel, besides dereliction of duty on their part. This prima facie, establishes the negligence on the part of the State machinery and dereliction of duty of the concerned police personnel. 4.58 In response to the show cause notice issued to the DGP, UP, he informed that the guilty police personnel had been placed under suspension and appropriate action is being taken against them in accordance with the law. No response was, however, received to the show cause notice from the Chief Secretary, UP, inspite of reminders. The Commission, therefore, recommended to the State Government to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the next of kin of the deceased as interim relief u/s 18 (3) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Compliance report from the State Government was still awaited. 34 AR-Chapter-1-19-10-6-06.p65 National Human Rights Commission Annual Report - 2004-2005 54 7/17/06, 6:29 PM