NHRC, India Commission obtained the requisite reports/records from the Investigation Division and got it analysed. As per the FIR, the Head Constable (HC) received information at about 02:45 am dated 02.09.2017 from the PS regarding a dacoity at an ATM by the occupants of a stolen car. The constable at the check post got its AK-47 rifle in a ready position on this information. Meanwhile, a speeding car tried to cross the barricade at the check post. Due to the sudden act of the car, the constable lost his balance, which led to fire from his rifle. After firing, the car hit the electric pole and stopped. From the car, three people ran away from the spot, two occupants were found injured in the car. They were sent to CHC Nalagarh for treatment. iii. A spot enquiry by the Tehsildar, Nalambgarh, District Solan, revealed that one person died in the police firing and another was injured. The deceased had injuries over the face and head. He had died of gunshot injuries. The Post-mortem report revealed gunshot wounds on the top of the head due to which both cerebral hemispheres were blown up. No evidence of scorching, burning or tattooing around the gunshot wound was found. No evidence of injury on the rest of the body parts. Injury of the brain and head is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The FSL report revealed small pieces of lead found in the exhibits. iv. The Enquiry Magistrate recorded the statements of the police officials involved in the incidents, relatives of the deceased and co-accused in the case and the doctors, who conducted the post-mortem. He also examined the preliminary enquiry report conducted by the Tehsildar, Nalagarh, the post-mortem report and the FSL report. The post-mortem report revealed that the gunshot wound at the head and brain area was sufficient to cause death. The report of FSL revealed that retained pieces of lead were found, which corroborates injury by gunshot. The father of the deceased did not raise any allegation. However, it was stated that he didn't know any of the persons accompanying his son at the time of the incident. The other co-accused apprehended by the police also corroborated the version of the police. Based on the statements and documents the enquiry magistrate opined that it was quite evident that the death of the accused was due to a bullet shot, which was fired at the deceased from behind. The enquiry magistrate concluded that the deceased died due to a gunshot fired at him behind from the rifle AK-47 of Head Constable Kishore Kumar, who inadvertently and accidentally fired at the car. v. However, the Investigation Division of NHRC observed certain lacunas in the police theory as well as the Magisterial Enquiry. It was pointed out by the Investigation Division of NHRC that no weapon was used by the occupants of the car after it got hit by an electric pole. The head constable cocked the rifle in an alert position as per the information of the ATM heist, but it failed to put the safety lock on the AK-47 which could easily be changed in time of emergency. Further, two people received bullet injuries in the incident which suggested that multiple rounds were fired from the rifle, which meant that either the rifle was at the burst position or the Head constable was continuously pulling the trigger. Both actions show that the HC was not trained in handling the AK 47 rifle. The SDM in the Magisterial Enquiry had concluded that the deceased died due to accidental firing by the Head Constable. Section 80 of IPC postulates that "Accident in doing a lawful act—nothing is an offence, which is done ANNUAL REPORT 58 2021-22