E-Paper
Haryana: ₹2-lakh relief for Yamunanagar man acquitted after 5-year trial
Referring to Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, the Haryana Human Rights Commission observed that compensation in public law cannot be confined to reimbursement of expenses alone, but must constitute just and comprehensive redress
A Yamunanagar resident, Ram Avtar, who was acquitted after facing a criminal trial that lasted nearly five years, has been awarded a compensation of ₹2 lakh by the Haryana Human Rights Commission.
The Yamunanagar superintendent of police had submitted a proposal for a compensation of ₹70,000 to cover advocate’s fees, travel expenses and loss of wages on account of court hearings.
However, the commission double bench comprising chairperson justice Lalit Batra and member (judicial) Kuldip Jain noted that the mental agony, social stigma, loss of reputation, adverse impact on livelihood and family distress suffered by an innocent person during prolonged criminal proceedings were far more extensive and serious.
In the detailed order made available on Wednesday, the bench said the proposed amount merely covered partial reimbursement of direct pecuniary losses. The commission further held that facing a criminal trial was not merely a matter of financial expenditure. The order did not specify the nature of the offence that Ram Avatar was accused of committing.
“Being arrayed as an accused deeply affects one’s social reputation, personal dignity and future prospects. Repeated court appearances result in the individual being viewed with suspicion in society; employment opportunities are adversely affected; personal and family life is disrupted; and the psychological burden of a pending criminal case continues for years. Even after acquittal, the scars of humiliation, stress and reputational damage do not disappear immediately,” it said.
Referring to Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, the bench observed that compensation in public law cannot be confined to reimbursement of expenses alone, but must constitute just and comprehensive redress.
Considering these circumstances, the commission found ₹2 lakh to be just, fair and reasonable during its hearing on February 12.
The bench clarified that it had the statutory authority under Section 18(a)(i) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, to recommend such a compensation, the order read.
The Haryana director general of police has been directed to submit a compliance report at least one week prior to the next date of hearing on April 1.
The commission also took notice of how during departmental proceedings arising from similar facts, one officer was awarded the punishment of stoppage of two annual increments with permanent effect, whereas other officers were awarded stoppage of two annual increments with temporary effect.
The bench held that in identical factual circumstances, disparity in the nature and quantum of punishment, without any cogent or distinguishing reasons, reflected inconsistency in the disciplinary approach.
Assistant registrar Puneet Arora said upon examining the available facts and records, the double bench had recommended that the superintendent of police reconsider/review the comparatively lighter punishment imposed upon the officials concerned to ensure uniformity, proportionality, and fairness in disciplinary action.
