SATNAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the complaints made by Binder Kaur (respondent No.3), Punjab State Human Rights Commission (for short, 'the Commission') took cognizance of the matter. Her grievance was that false applications were made by one Kartar Singh at P.S. City South, P.S. Ghal Kalan and to C.I.A., Moga, alleging that she and her family members murdered his son Jasbir Singh. P.S. City South and P.S. Ghal Kalan after necessary investigation allowed them to go. However, Inspector Satnam Singh (petitioner), Incharge C.I.A., illegally detained her husband Roop Singh from 14.09.2009 to 15.09.2009. And thereafter, her son Amarjit Singh @ Abarjit Singh from 15.09.2009 to 22.09.2009. Abarjit Singh was purported to have been tortured and Inspector Satnam Singh demanded a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to release him.

(2.) Binder Kaur expressed her dissatisfaction vis-a-vis the veracity of two reports, dated 02.09.2009, submitted by S.S.P., Moga and report dated 26.04.2010, submitted by A.D.G.P., Crime. Resultantly, the inquiry was entrusted to A.D.G.P. of the Commission. A detailed report, dated 07.12.2010, was submitted by the A.D.G.P. Allegations, only in relation to illegal detention of Abarjit Singh at C.I.A., Moga were found to have been proved. Complainant Binder Kaur prayed for an action against Inspector Satnam Singh and compensation to the extent of Rs. 50,00,000/- for defamation etc.

(3.) A show cause notice under Section 16 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, was issued to Inspector Satnam Singh. And a response was filed by him on 16.07.2012. He expressed his grievance, that Sukhdev Singh, Inquiry Officer, Office of A.D.G.P., conducted the inquiry at his back. He was not given an opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and her witnesses. That being the case, the Commission ordered the parties to appear before the A.D.G.P. on 14.05.2013. It was observed, that the statements made by the parties in chief in support of their respective cases be maintained, however, an opportunity to cross-examine was afforded to both the sides. Accordingly, a supplementary report, dated 11.12.2013 (Annexure P-4), was submitted by the A.D.G.P. It was found that Inspector Satnam Singh failed to produce any evidence to contradict the findings recorded against him in the detailed inquiry report dated 07.12.2010. Further, there was no material on record to conclude that Inspector Satnam Singh was not guilty of having illegally detained Abarjit Singh.