Delhi High Court sets aside NHRC order to pay ₹5 lakh compensation to kin of man who died at police station

The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) directing the Delhi Police to pay a compensation of ₹5 lakh to the kin of a man who was found dead in its custody.

Justice Amit Mahajan allowed a petition filed by the Delhi Police challenging the April 19, 2024, order of the commission.

"The proceedings before respondent no.1 (NHRC) are summary in nature, and in view of the contentions..., the recommendation made by respondent no.1 for the payment of ₹5 lakh as monetary compensation on the ground that there was negligence in the prevention of violation of human rights on the part of the police officials cannot be sustained. Accordingly, in view of the above, and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed, and the impugned order is set aside," the court said in its order passed on October 12 and uploaded on its website on Wednesday (October 14).

The court noted that the NHRC order concerns the death of Rashid Raza, who was found dead in a room on the ground floor of a police station in the Narela Industrial Area in December 2019.

The NHRC order said the man was in police custody and it was the responsibility of police to prevent any harm. Had they been vigilant, the suicide could have been prevented, it said.

The court, however, held that there was no independent basis to develop an inference of negligence on the part of police officials.

"The death, though extremely unfortunate, does not ipso facto raise a presumption of negligence. The location of the death, though a relevant factor, ought not to be the only factor to fasten liability," it said.

The court said the inquest report by a sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) said there was no evidence of scuffle or torture at the police station and the CCTV footage showed unrestricted movement on the part of the man and also suggested that the incident may have occurred without police having a reasonable opportunity to intervene.

"In such circumstances, in the absence of material establishing a specific omission, prior knowledge of imminent danger, or a reasonable opportunity to prevent the occurrence, negligence cannot be fastened upon the police by inference alone merely because the deceased happened to be at the police station.

"A tragic consequence, however grave, does not by itself establish culpable inaction. This court does not intend to and is not stating that police officials ought not to be vigilant or that unnatural death when in custody of police may not attract consequence," the court said.

It said liability must rest upon demonstrable negligence and not merely hindsight or presumption.

What the NHRC has essentially sought to punish in this case is the lack of hindsight on the part of the petitioner to have anticipated and consequently, prevented the death of the deceased who had come to the police station voluntarily and whose movement was not restricted. The same cannot, in the opinion of this court, be countenanced, it said.

The police's counsel had earlier contended that Raza had visited the police station unannounced and without any prior notice to inquire about his wife's body.

The court had noted that the transcript of the audio recording sent by the man from his phone to his brother prima facie indicated that he ended his own life.

Assistance for overcoming suicidal thoughts is available on the Tele-MANAS 14416 and Sneha’s suicide prevention helpline 044-24640050.