BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, FARIDKOT HOUSE, COPERNICUS MARG,
NEW DELHI-110001
COMPLAINT NO. …………. OF 2012
IN THE MATTER OF: -
1. SH. PROMOTHET GURU
S/O SH. KSHYAMANIDHI GURU,
AT MUNICIPALITY SAHI,
P.S./DISTRICT DEOGARH.ORISSA
2. SH. PRANAV GURU
S/O SH. KSHYAMANIDHI GURU,
AT MUNICIPALITY SAHI,
P.S./DISTRICT DEOGARH.ORISSA
3. SH. AJAY MISHRA
S/O SH. KUNJ BIHARI MISHRA,
AT BHIYAN SAHI,
P.S./DISTRICT DEOGARH.ORISSA
4. SH. BISWAL
S/O SH. B.N. BISWAL,
AT P.O./P.S. RENGALI,
DISTT. ANGUL.ORISSA
5. SH. SHAIBSHIS SATPATHY
S/O ARCHAND SATPATHY,
AT GURU SAHI,
P.S./DISTRICT DEOGARH.ORISSA
6. SH. SRIBASTA MISHRA
S/O SH.
AT ORISSA
….. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF ORISSA
THROUGH ITS CHIEFSECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, BHUBANESWAR- 751001, ORISSA
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (D.G.P.)
CB, CUTTACK, ORISSA.
3. THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER (I.O.)
OF F.I.R. NO. 188/03, U/S 395 IPC
P.S. DEOGARH, ORISSA. ….. RESPONDENTS
COMPLAINT REGARDING VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE PETITIONERS BY WAY OF IMPLICATING IN FALSE CASE AND WHEREBY INFLICTING PHYSICAL HARASSMENT, MENTAL TORTURE LEVELLING STIGMA AND LOWERING REPORTATION PRESTIGE IN THE SOCIETY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the petitioners who are peace loving citizens of India, are approaching this Hon'ble Commission by filing the aforesaid complaint against the respondents for violation of their Human Rights by way of implicating them in the false case by the respondents by registering F.I.R. No. 188/03 under Section 395 IPC and finally filing charge sheet against the petitioners and cognizance of offence Under Section 395 IPC was taken by the Ld. S.D.J.M., Deogarh in Case No. 494/03 dated 03.12.2007 which was held not sustainable by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in Crl. Revision No. 648/2009 and thereafter, the petitioners could save themselves from the clutches of the respondents.
2. That the petitioner no. 1 is a lawyer and has worked as APP in Deogarh Court. He got married after the charges were quashed by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa because only due to the registration of F.I.R. and filing of the charge sheet after four years of the occurrence of the incident showing him the petitioners as absconders, he could not get married in time and suffered mental torture throughout the period till the charge was declared to be not sustainable by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa. It is very pertinent to mention here that all the petitioners have maintained their live smoothly in the locality where they reside and they have never absconded from the said locality. Petitioner no 2 is the brother of petitioner no. 1and is a journalist and was reporter at “Samay News Paper” and he is presently working in “Sea Sore T.V.” Petitioners no. 3 & 4 are the businessmen. Petitioner no. 3 Ajay Mishra’s mother died because of blood pressure and tension caused by the said false case. Even the education of his children got hampered due to the aforesaid case for a long time. Even petitioner no. 4 Biswal could not get married till the charges framed against him and others were declared not sustainable by the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa. Petitioner no. 5 Subhasis Satpati is a law student in Deogarh Law College and petitioner no. 6 Shriwastha Mishra is a advocate and he has a daughter of three years and his profession got adversely affected due to the aforesaid false case registered against him by the respondents without having any prima-facie material to substantiate it the ingredients of Section 395 IPC.
3. That the facts of the case giving rise to the present complaint are as follows: -
(A) On 24.11.2003, the petitioners were arrested by the C.I. of Police Deogarh on F.I.R. alleged to have been lodged by one Mandakini Garnayak W/o Madhu Sudan Garnayak and they were produced before the SDJM, Deogarh under the allegations that the petitioners have committed offence u/s 395 IPC and the learned SDJM remanded them to Judicial Custody rejecting the bail petition in connection with Deogarh PS Case No. 168 dated 20.11.2003 even after recording the following “the informant Mandakini Garnayak has filed an affidavit stating that she does not want to proceed the case and that she has not lodged any FIR.”
(B) The abovesaid action was initiated by the C.I. of Police Deogarh against the petitioner under the plea that on 30.11.2003 some persons arrived at the house of the informant and searched for one John Kumar Nayak, who was staying in her house with family on rental basis. The informant told them that said John has left the house once for all. There after the petitioner entered the house where John was staying and took away two bags of religious books left by him.
(C) Even though the so called informant Mandakini Garnayak sworn an affidavit wherein she has categorically denied to have lodged any such F.I.R. and the alleged F.I.R. has not been written by her rather some police officials came to her and took the signature on plain paper the C.I. of Police Deogarh proceeded with the case. Even during investigation in the statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. the informant and other witnesses have never supported the F.I.R. story.
(D) As the C.I. of Police Deogarh submitted charge sheet u/s 395 IPC against the petitioners without any material evidence and the learned SDJM Deogarh took cognizance of the offence and proceeded with the case, the petitioner finding no other alternative preferred to knock the doors of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa initiating a Crl. Revision case bearing No. 648/2009.
(E) The Hon'ble High Court after scrutinizing the LCR observed “As perusal of materials on record including the case diary did not prima facie indicate commission of offence under Section 395 of the IPC, an affidavit was directed to be filed and, accordingly, affidavit dated 6.11.2010 has been filed. Averments made in the affidavit are altogether silent in the matter of justification of filing of charge-sheet under Section 395 of the IPC. Learned Counsel for the state is constrained to concede that there is no indication in the affidavit regarding materials on the basis of which charge-sheet under Section 395 of the IPC has been filed. Therefore, in the absence of any material indicating commission of offence under Section 395 of the IPC the impugned order taking cognizance of offence Under Section 395 of the IPC by the learned SDJM, Deogarh in GR Case No. 494 of 2003 is not sustainable. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the proceeding against the petitioner in GR Case No. 494 of 2003 is dropped.”
4. That thereafter, the Ld. S.D.J.M. Deogarh vide its order dated 19.02.2011 dropped the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 494/03 in view of the order passed by Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in Crl. Revision No. 648/09.
5. That for the false implication by the respondents, the petitioners lost name and fame in the society and they have undergone physical harassment, mental torture, financial burden for a long 8 years of their precious life and they got prejudiced due to the arbitrary action of the respondents which is not only violative of different provisions of law but the same caused irreparable loss to them amounting to clear violation of Human Rights as under Artice 21 of the Constitution of India, every citizen has the fundamental right to leave with dignity and honour in the society. Even every professional and businessmen have the right to continue his profession and to do his business without any unwanted restraint and hindrance from the side of State Missionary who is bound to keep harmony in the society and to allow the citizens of India to live with the dignity and to lead a peaceful life in the absence of any justified and proper complaint.
6. That the State Machinery knowingly and intentionally implicated the petitioners in a false case inspite of a categorical statement of the informant that she has never lodged any complaint and to this effect she has shown affidavit before the SDJN Deogarh on dated 24.11.2003 and subsequently ignoring the said affidavit and requirements under Section 395 IPC, the respondents submitted the charge sheet showing the petitioners as absconders after 4 years of incident which shows that the respondents had grudge against the petitioners and they wanted to take revenge of something which is best known to the respondents and by doing so they intentionally ignored the consequences of the same which could be born by the petitioners and at the same time the sufferance of the petitioners at the hands of the respondents which lead to the clear violation of the Human Rights of the petitioners for which they deserved to be compensated in the terms of money and further the respondents, be awarded the adequate punishment for the aforesaid offence committed by them against the petitioners by way of outraising and violating the Human Rights of the petitioners which they were enjoying without any hindrance.
7. That the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa interfere in the Crl. Revision filed by the petitioners no. 1 to 5 and set-aside the impugned order taking cognizance of offence U/s 395 IPC by the Ld. SDJM Deogarh vide its order dated 19.02.2011 observing that even though accused Shri Satsa Mishra was not a petitioner in Crl. Revision No. 648/09, since the order of taking cognizance was set-aside by the Hon'ble High Court, the proceeding against the said accused is also to be dropped alongwith others and as such petitioner no. 6 also got relief.
8. That the petitioners have not filed similar complaint either before any Court/State Human Right Commission after the order dated 19.02.2011 passed by the SDJM Deogarh dropping the proceedings against the petitioners in GR No. 494/03.
P R A Y E R
Therefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Commission may graciously be pleased to: -
(a) Direct the respondents to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- each for the violation of their Human Rights mentioned Supra;
(b) Direct the respondents to pay ad-interim compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- each till the final disposal of the aforesaid complaint;
(c) Direct respondents no. 1 & 2 to take appropriate departmental action against the respondent no. 3 for awarding adequate punishment as per the provision of law.
(d) Any further relief may be granted to the petitioners which this Hon'ble Commission may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the aforesaid case, in the interest of justice.
NEW DELHI
DATED: .02.2012
PETITIONER NO. 1
(PROMOTHET GURU)
PETITIONER NO. 2
(PRANAV GURU)
PETITIONER NO. 3
(AJAY MISHRA)
PETITIONER NO. 4
(BISWAL)
PETITIONER NO. 5
(SHAIBSHIS SATPATHY)
PETITIONER NO. 6
(SRIBASTA MISHRA)
THROUGH
COUNSEL
BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, FARIDKOT HOUSE, COPERNICUS MARG,
NEW DELHI-110001
COMPLAINT NO. …………. OF 2012
IN THE MATTER OF: -
SH. PROMOTHET GURU & ORS. ….. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ORISSA & ORS. ….. RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Promothet Guru S/o Sh. Kshyamanidhi Guru, At Municipality Sahi, P.S./District Deogarh.
I, the above named deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1. That I am the petitioner no. 1 in the abovenoted case and am well conversant with the facts of the case and am also competent to swear the present affidavit.
2. That the contents of the accompanying complainant regarding violation of Human Rights of petitioners, have been drafted by my counsel under my instructions and the contents thereof have been read over to me in vernacular language and the same are true to my knowledge and may be read, as part and parcel of this affidavit which are not been repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:-
Verified at Delhi on this day of February 2012, that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and belief. No part of it is false and nothing has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
