Annual Report 2009-2010 4.46 Since the magisterial inquiry and the police investigation established culpable liability on part of the concerned police personnel in the homicidal death of Sheroo Khan, the Commission vide its proceedings dated 24 January 2008 issued a show-cause notice to the State of Chha�isgarh u/s 18 (c ) of the PHRA. 4.47 The State Government responding to the show-cause notice of the Commission vide its communication dated 7 April 2008 made a request that it would be improper to award monetary relief to the next of kin of the deceased victim pending a final decision in the criminal case being pursued in the court. While considering the request made by the State Government, the Commission noted that the proceedings before it are independent of any other proceedings pending in any other forum. Moreover, the Commission does not insist on rigorous proof as is done in a criminal case trial. It acts on preponderance of probabilities. For the purpose of recommending monetary relief, it is sufficient that the homicidal death occurred in police custody. Moreover, the findings of the magisterial inquiry cannot be ignored. 4.48 Considering all the circumstances, the Commission on 30 June 2008 recommended to the Government of Chha�isgarh to pay a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as monetary relief to the next of kin of the deceased Sheroo Khan. 4.49 On receipt of the compliance report from the State Government, the case was closed by the Commission in November 2009. 8. Death of Kandula Tirupathi in Police Custody in Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh (Case No. 886/1/2004-2005-CD) 4.50 The Superintendent of Police of Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh on 21 February 2005 informed the NHRC about the death of one Kandula Tirupathi in police custody on 20 February 2005. The deceased was suspected to be involved in a terrorist activity. He was arrested from Marripally village on 20 February 2005. During the time of arrest, some arms and ammunitions were recovered from Kandula. He then took the police party to a hillock for further recovery. There he allegedly pushed a Constable and jumped from the hillock in a bid to escape. He sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. 4.51 Pursuant to the directions given by the Commission, the Magistrate who enquired into the death of Kandula Tirupathi concluded that he had commi�ed suicide by jumping from the hillock. He observed that the deceased was afraid of reprisal by the extremists. 4.52 Considering the manner in which the incident occurred, the Commission felt that the police escort was not vigilant and alert. It observed that if the policemen had been watchful and cautious, the deceased would not have been able to elude grasp. The fact that the deceased was able to free himself from the custody of the police indicates negligence on their part and therefore renders the State liable for the incident. Consequently, the Commission issued a notice to the Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh u/s 18 of the PHRA and also asked to show-cause as to why monetary relief should not be given to the next of kin of the deceased. 4.53 As the State failed to submit any reply to the show-cause notice, the Commission presumed that the State has nothing to say in defence. 24 NHRC