Almost four years after the State Human Rights Committee (SHRC) ordered the victims of awarding remuneration, the police still have to pay the money. Despite the specific orders, two police officials were not found guilty of human rights violations.
This was published to the information committee of Tamil Nadu (TIC) after the victim appealed against the response of the state police to his questions under the right to information in 2005.
P. Selvaraj represented his wife S. Kullammal of Pallagacheri of the Kalkurichi district, which was granted compensation. He also wanted a copy of the government order issued on the basis of the Shrc command. Given that the public information official and the first appeal did not exist any correct response, he moved the appeal before TIC.
During the investigation, it became clear that the Tamil Government adopted the recommendations of the SHRC under Section 18 of the Human Rights Act of 1993 and issued an order to declare 23 2021, ordered the CEO to cancel the compensation of Mrs. Kullammal and send the proof of payment and agreement “immediately”.
The government also ordered DGP to initiate disciplinary proceedings, as Shrc recommended against the representatives of the police director, VM Madhivanan and a special inspector of the Thiyagadurgam Police Station, Balasubramanian, who then served in the Kallakurichi district.
Arrest
In her petition, Mrs. Kullammal claimed that the police not only participated in the civil dispute in favor of the accused, but registered a false case against her husband and brother and arrested them in 2016. In his order, he would notify that with the exception of abominable crimes such as murder, rape and dacoit. would avoid laws that would threaten to approach the laws to deal with law to deal with law to deal with law, to draw to be on and threaten to avoid law to avoid law or avoid witnesses or witnesses. offenses if they are not arrested etc.
“It is not right to say that just because the company is registered, the defendant may be immediately arrested. It is an imaginary fear that only because the company has been registered, would require the arrest of the accused and thus loss of his reputation … when the innocent person is falsely involved but falsely believes. That it is serious, “he said he was seriously affected,” he said it was serious, “he said he was an innocent person.
Required explanation
After hearing both parties in the appeal filed in front of the TIC, the main information commissioner (CIC) M. Shakeel Akhter said that the petition had sent Mr. Selvaraj to the police directorate in 2021, which was transferred to the police director of the police, Kallakurichi. He called on Pio/AIG, why should not take steps against him.
CIC also ordered the authorities to provide the petitioner in writing that the quantum of compensation was transferred to the Government for appropriation and also that no disciplinary measures have been taken against these two police staff.
Published – May 15, 2025 20:10
