More »
SEARCH RESULT
Total Matching Records found : 69
Warning (2): preg_replace(): Unknown modifier '2' [APP/Template/SearchResult/index.ctp, line 34]Code Context$titleText = preg_replace('/(' . $qryStr . ')/is', "<font style='background-color:yellow;'>" . $qryStr . "</font>", strip_tags($titleText));$descText = preg_replace('/(' . $qryStr . ')/is', "<font style='background-color:yellow;'>" . $qryStr . "</font>", strip_tags($descText));$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/SearchResult/index.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'articleList' => object(Cake\ORM\ResultSet) { 'items' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'qryStr' => 'Human Development Report 2021/22', 'mostViewSectionData' => [], 'topTwentyTags' => [ (int) 0 => 'Agriculture', (int) 1 => 'Food Security', (int) 2 => 'Law and Justice', (int) 3 => 'Health', (int) 4 => 'Right to Food', (int) 5 => 'Corruption', (int) 6 => 'farming', (int) 7 => 'Environment', (int) 8 => 'Right to Information', (int) 9 => 'NREGS', (int) 10 => 'Human Rights', (int) 11 => 'Governance', (int) 12 => 'PDS', (int) 13 => 'COVID-19', (int) 14 => 'Land Acquisition', (int) 15 => 'mgnrega', (int) 16 => 'Farmers', (int) 17 => 'transparency', (int) 18 => 'Gender', (int) 19 => 'Poverty' ], 'bottomNewsAlertArticlesData' => [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 65259, 'name' => ' Moving Upstream: Luni – Fellowship', 'seo_url' => 'moving-upstream-luni-fellowship', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 65169, 'name' => ' 135 Million Indians Exited “Multidimensional" Poverty as per Government...', 'seo_url' => '135-million-indians-exited-multidimensional-poverty-as-per-government-figures-is-that-the-same-as-poverty-reduction', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 65120, 'name' => ' Explainer: Why are Tomato Prices on Fire?', 'seo_url' => 'explainer-why-are-tomato-prices-on-fire', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 64981, 'name' => ' NSSO Survey: Only 39.1% of all Households have Drinking...', 'seo_url' => 'nsso-survey-only-39-1-of-all-households-have-drinking-water-within-dwelling-46-7-of-rural-households-use-firewood-for-cooking', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ] ], 'videosData' => [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 393, 'name' => ' Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...', 'seo_url' => 'Short-Video-on-im4change-Hindi-website-Inclusive-Media-for-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/I51LYnP8BOk/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 392, 'name' => ' "Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-1- Scope-of-IDEA-and-AgriStack-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/kNqha-SwfIY/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 390, 'name' => ' "Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-2-Farmer-Centric-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/6kIVjlgZItk/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 389, 'name' => ' "Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-3-Future-of-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/2BeHTu0y7xc/1.jpg' ] ], 'videos_archivesData' => [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 388, 'name' => ' Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for...', 'title' => 'Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for Agrarian Studies)', 'seo_url' => 'Public-Spending-on-Agriculture-in-India-Source-Foundation-for-Agrarian-Studies', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/s6ScX4zFRyU/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 387, 'name' => ' Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws...', 'title' => 'Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws in India' by Prof. Vikas Rawal, JNU (Source: Journal Of Agrarian Change) ', 'seo_url' => 'Agrarian-Change-Seminar-Protests-against-the-New-Farm-Laws-in-India-by-Prof-Vikas-Rawal-JNU-Source-Journal-Of-Agrarian-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/SwSmSv0CStE/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 386, 'name' => ' Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis...', 'title' => 'Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis (Source: Azim Premji University)', 'seo_url' => 'Webinar-Ramrao-The-Story-of-India-Farm-Crisis-Source-Azim-Premji-University', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/sSxUZnSDXgY/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 385, 'name' => ' Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship...', 'title' => 'Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship (Source: IGIDR)', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-agricultural-transformation-in-India', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/BcaVuNYK_e8/1.jpg' ] ], 'urlPrefix' => '', 'rightLinl_success' => 'Success Stories', 'rightLinl_interview' => 'Interviews', 'rightLinl_interview_link' => 'interviews', 'readMoreAlerts' => 'Read More', 'moreNewAlerts' => 'More News Alerts...', 'moreNewsClippings' => 'More...', 'lang' => 'EN', 'dataReportArticleMenu' => [ (int) 8 => [ (int) 1 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 6 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 33 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 7 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 35 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 2 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 9 => [ (int) 36 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 30 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 29 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 28 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 3192 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 11 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 3193 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 27 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 18 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 10 => [ (int) 20357 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 13 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 21 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 20 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 12 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 15 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 14 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 57 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 23 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 12 => [ (int) 22 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 25 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 24 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 13 => [ (int) 20358 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 17 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 26 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 8 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 16 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 19 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ] ], 'dataReportCat' => [ (int) 8 => 'Farm Crisis', (int) 9 => 'Empowerment', (int) 10 => 'Hunger / HDI', (int) 12 => 'Environment', (int) 13 => 'Law & Justice' ], 'curPageURL' => 'https://im4change.in/search?page=12&qryStr=Human+Development+Report+2021%2F22', 'youtube_video_id' => 'MmaTlntk-wc', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $articleList = object(Cake\ORM\ResultSet) { 'items' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 1 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 2 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 3 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 4 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {} ] } $qryStr = 'Human Development Report 2021/22' $mostViewSectionData = [] $topTwentyTags = [ (int) 0 => 'Agriculture', (int) 1 => 'Food Security', (int) 2 => 'Law and Justice', (int) 3 => 'Health', (int) 4 => 'Right to Food', (int) 5 => 'Corruption', (int) 6 => 'farming', (int) 7 => 'Environment', (int) 8 => 'Right to Information', (int) 9 => 'NREGS', (int) 10 => 'Human Rights', (int) 11 => 'Governance', (int) 12 => 'PDS', (int) 13 => 'COVID-19', (int) 14 => 'Land Acquisition', (int) 15 => 'mgnrega', (int) 16 => 'Farmers', (int) 17 => 'transparency', (int) 18 => 'Gender', (int) 19 => 'Poverty' ] $bottomNewsAlertArticlesData = [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 65259, 'name' => ' Moving Upstream: Luni – Fellowship', 'seo_url' => 'moving-upstream-luni-fellowship', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 65169, 'name' => ' 135 Million Indians Exited “Multidimensional" Poverty as per Government...', 'seo_url' => '135-million-indians-exited-multidimensional-poverty-as-per-government-figures-is-that-the-same-as-poverty-reduction', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 65120, 'name' => ' Explainer: Why are Tomato Prices on Fire?', 'seo_url' => 'explainer-why-are-tomato-prices-on-fire', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 64981, 'name' => ' NSSO Survey: Only 39.1% of all Households have Drinking...', 'seo_url' => 'nsso-survey-only-39-1-of-all-households-have-drinking-water-within-dwelling-46-7-of-rural-households-use-firewood-for-cooking', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ] ] $videosData = [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 393, 'name' => ' Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...', 'seo_url' => 'Short-Video-on-im4change-Hindi-website-Inclusive-Media-for-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/I51LYnP8BOk/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 392, 'name' => ' "Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-1- Scope-of-IDEA-and-AgriStack-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/kNqha-SwfIY/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 390, 'name' => ' "Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-2-Farmer-Centric-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/6kIVjlgZItk/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 389, 'name' => ' "Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-3-Future-of-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/2BeHTu0y7xc/1.jpg' ] ] $videos_archivesData = [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 388, 'name' => ' Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for...', 'title' => 'Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for Agrarian Studies)', 'seo_url' => 'Public-Spending-on-Agriculture-in-India-Source-Foundation-for-Agrarian-Studies', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/s6ScX4zFRyU/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 387, 'name' => ' Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws...', 'title' => 'Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws in India' by Prof. Vikas Rawal, JNU (Source: Journal Of Agrarian Change) ', 'seo_url' => 'Agrarian-Change-Seminar-Protests-against-the-New-Farm-Laws-in-India-by-Prof-Vikas-Rawal-JNU-Source-Journal-Of-Agrarian-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/SwSmSv0CStE/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 386, 'name' => ' Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis...', 'title' => 'Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis (Source: Azim Premji University)', 'seo_url' => 'Webinar-Ramrao-The-Story-of-India-Farm-Crisis-Source-Azim-Premji-University', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/sSxUZnSDXgY/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 385, 'name' => ' Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship...', 'title' => 'Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship (Source: IGIDR)', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-agricultural-transformation-in-India', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/BcaVuNYK_e8/1.jpg' ] ] $urlPrefix = '' $rightLinl_success = 'Success Stories' $rightLinl_interview = 'Interviews' $rightLinl_interview_link = 'interviews' $readMoreAlerts = 'Read More' $moreNewAlerts = 'More News Alerts...' $moreNewsClippings = 'More...' $lang = 'EN' $dataReportArticleMenu = [ (int) 8 => [ (int) 1 => [ 'title' => 'Farm Suicides', 'days' => (float) 728, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-27 01:16:01', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672099200, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/farmers039-suicides-14.html' ], (int) 6 => [ 'title' => 'Unemployment', 'days' => (float) 735, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-20 05:36:30', 'modifydate' => (int) 1671494400, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/unemployment-30.html' ], (int) 33 => [ 'title' => 'Rural distress', 'days' => (float) 767, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-11-18 01:08:04', 'modifydate' => (int) 1668729600, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/rural-distress-70.html' ], (int) 7 => [ 'title' => 'Migration', 'days' => (float) 767, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-11-18 01:07:46', 'modifydate' => (int) 1668729600, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/migration-34.html' ], (int) 35 => [ 'title' => 'Key Facts', 'days' => (float) 1252, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-07-21 12:30:36', 'modifydate' => (int) 1626825600, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/key-facts-72.html' ], (int) 2 => [ 'title' => 'Debt Trap', 'days' => (float) 2375, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2018-06-24 08:27:27', 'modifydate' => (int) 1529798400, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/debt-trap-15.html' ] ], (int) 9 => [ (int) 36 => [ 'title' => 'Union Budget And Other Economic Policies', 'days' => (float) 621, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-04-13 05:00:51', 'modifydate' => (int) 1681344000, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/union-budget-73.html' ], (int) 30 => [ 'title' => 'Forest and Tribal Rights', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:57:02', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/forest-and-tribal-rights-61.html' ], (int) 29 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Education', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:56:34', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-education-60.html' ], (int) 28 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Food', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:55:28', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-food-59.html' ], (int) 3192 => [ 'title' => 'Displacement', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:54:47', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/displacement-3279.html' ], (int) 11 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Work (MG-NREGA)', 'days' => (float) 721, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-01-03 02:48:52', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672704000, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-work-mg-nrega-39.html' ], (int) 3193 => [ 'title' => 'GENDER', 'days' => (float) 735, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-20 05:37:26', 'modifydate' => (int) 1671494400, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/gender-3280.html' ], (int) 27 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Information', 'days' => (float) 804, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-10-12 01:58:29', 'modifydate' => (int) 1665532800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-information-58.html' ], (int) 18 => [ 'title' => 'Social Audit', 'days' => (float) 1510, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2020-11-05 09:19:21', 'modifydate' => (int) 1604534400, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/social-audit-48.html' ] ], (int) 10 => [ (int) 20357 => [ 'title' => 'Poverty and inequality', 'days' => (float) 586, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-05-18 10:06:37', 'modifydate' => (int) 1684368000, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/poverty-and-inequality-20499.html' ], (int) 13 => [ 'title' => 'Malnutrition', 'days' => (float) 721, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-01-03 02:49:33', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672704000, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/malnutrition-41.html' ], (int) 21 => [ 'title' => 'Public Health', 'days' => (float) 721, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-01-03 02:49:11', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672704000, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/public-health-51.html' ], (int) 20 => [ 'title' => 'Education', 'days' => (float) 728, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-27 01:19:42', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672099200, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/education-50.html' ], (int) 12 => [ 'title' => 'Hunger Overview', 'days' => (float) 735, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-20 05:39:23', 'modifydate' => (int) 1671494400, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/hunger-overview-40.html' ], (int) 15 => [ 'title' => 'HDI Overview', 'days' => (float) 750, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-05 01:24:58', 'modifydate' => (int) 1670198400, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/hdi-overview-45.html' ], (int) 14 => [ 'title' => 'PDS/ Ration/ Food Security', 'days' => (float) 797, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-10-19 03:14:42', 'modifydate' => (int) 1666137600, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/pds-ration-food-security-42.html' ], (int) 57 => [ 'title' => 'SDGs', 'days' => (float) 847, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-08-30 02:45:06', 'modifydate' => (int) 1661817600, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/sdgs-113.html' ], (int) 23 => [ 'title' => 'Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS)', 'days' => (float) 1223, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-08-19 12:40:33', 'modifydate' => (int) 1629331200, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/mid-day-meal-scheme-mdms-53.html' ] ], (int) 12 => [ (int) 22 => [ 'title' => 'Time Bomb Ticking', 'days' => (float) 727, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-28 02:29:19', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672185600, 'seo_url' => 'environment/time-bomb-ticking-52.html' ], (int) 25 => [ 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'days' => (float) 861, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-08-16 03:24:37', 'modifydate' => (int) 1660608000, 'seo_url' => 'environment/water-and-sanitation-55.html' ], (int) 24 => [ 'title' => 'Impact on Agriculture', 'days' => (float) 1567, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2020-09-09 09:23:52', 'modifydate' => (int) 1599609600, 'seo_url' => 'environment/impact-on-agriculture-54.html' ] ], (int) 13 => [ (int) 20358 => [ 'title' => 'Social Justice', 'days' => (float) 249, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2024-04-19 12:29:31', 'modifydate' => (int) 1713484800, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/social-justice-20500.html' ], (int) 17 => [ 'title' => 'Access to Justice', 'days' => (float) 580, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-05-24 09:31:16', 'modifydate' => (int) 1684886400, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/access-to-justice-47.html' ], (int) 26 => [ 'title' => 'Human Rights', 'days' => (float) 943, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-05-26 01:30:51', 'modifydate' => (int) 1653523200, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/human-rights-56.html' ], (int) 8 => [ 'title' => 'Corruption', 'days' => (float) 987, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-04-12 03:14:21', 'modifydate' => (int) 1649721600, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/corruption-35.html' ], (int) 16 => [ 'title' => 'General Insecurity', 'days' => (float) 1409, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-02-14 04:34:06', 'modifydate' => (int) 1613260800, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/general-insecurity-46.html' ], (int) 19 => [ 'title' => 'Disaster & Relief', 'days' => (float) 1409, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-02-14 04:23:38', 'modifydate' => (int) 1613260800, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/disaster-relief-49.html' ] ] ] $dataReportCat = [ (int) 8 => 'Farm Crisis', (int) 9 => 'Empowerment', (int) 10 => 'Hunger / HDI', (int) 12 => 'Environment', (int) 13 => 'Law & Justice' ] $curPageURL = 'https://im4change.in/search?page=12&qryStr=Human+Development+Report+2021%2F22' $youtube_video_id = 'MmaTlntk-wc' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin' $rn = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 26, 'title' => 'Human Rights', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS </span></p> <div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2016 was 92 and 351, respectively. The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2016 was 35 and 759, respectively <strong>#$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• In 2015, the NCRB recorded over 73 lakh complaints of cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to investigate, such as murder and rape. Between 2005 and 2015, crime rate (i.e., crime per lakh population) for cognizable crimes has increased by 28% from 456 complaints per lakh persons to 582 per lakh persons. This has been primarily because of increase in crime rates of alcohol-prohibition crime, theft, kidnapping and abduction, crimes against women and cheating <strong>"</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• At the national-level, the total number of deaths in police custody was 97 in 2015 <strong>$$</strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of police personnel charge-sheeted for human rights violation was 34 in 2015. No police personnel was convicted for human rights violation in 2015<strong> $$</strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2015 were 42 and 39, respectively. The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2015 were 7 and 298, respectively <strong>$$</strong><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 53.9 in 2015, which was 56.3 in 2014<strong> $$</strong><br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been the highest in Delhi UT (23.7), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (13.5) and Chhattisgarh (12.2)<strong> $$</strong><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has increased from 20.1 in 2014 to 21.1 in 2015 <strong>$$ </strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• India has detected trafficking victims from other countries in the subregion, particularly Nepal and Bangladesh. Victims trafficked from other areas– for example Eastern Europe - have also been detected in India, but only sporadically. Victims from a variety of countries in South-East Asia and the Indian sub-continent are trafficked mainly to the Gulf and other Middle Eastern countries<strong>**</strong><br /> <br /> • Globally, there has been a rise in the share of girl children in the total number of detected trafficking victims from 10% in 2004 to 21% in 2011. Similarly, the share of boy children in the total number of detected victims increased from 3% in 2004 to 12% in 2011. However, the share of adult women in the total number of detected victims fell from 74% in 2004 to 49% in 2011<strong>**</strong> </div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• In 2014 the percentage of elders abused went up drastically from 23% in the previous year to 50%. Women seemed to be more vulnerable with 52% women facing abuse as against 48% men<strong>*</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of crimes committed against women increased from 2,28,650 in 2011 to 2,44,270 in 2012. An increase of 1.1% in human trafficking incidence was observed (3,554 cases in 2012 as compared to 3,517 in 2011) <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of crimes committed against children increased from 33,098 in 2011 to 38,172 in 2012 <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of crimes committed against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in 2012 stood at 33,655 and 5,922, respectively <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• 205 cases of Human Rights Violation by Police were reported during 2012 out of which 19 were charge-sheeted <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• From 2001 to 2010, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) recorded 14,231 deaths in police and judicial custody in India. This includes 1,504 deaths in police custody and 12,727 deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010<strong>#</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• In the last three years, 2,044 cases of police torture were registered to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). These included 574 cases in 2008-2009, 615 cases in 2009-2010 and 855 cases in 2010-2011<strong>#</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC registered only a total of the 25 cases of death in the custody of the military/ para-military forces from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010 up to 28 February 2010<strong>#</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">#$ Crime in India 2016 Statistics (released in 2017), National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://www.ncrb.nic.in">www.ncrb.nic.in</a></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">" Police Reforms in India (June 2017), authored by Anviti Chaturvedi, PRS Legislative Research, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Police%20reforms%20in%20India.pdf">click here</a> to access </div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">$$ Crime in India 2015, National Crime Records Bureau (released in 2016), <a href="http://www.ncrb.nic.in">www.ncrb.nic.in</a></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">** Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2014, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), (please <a href="http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/glotip/GLOTIP_2014_full_report.pdf">click here</a> to access the report)</div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">* Elder Abuse in India (2014) by HelpAge India, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Elder%20Abuse%20in%20India%202014.pdf" title="Elder Abuse India 2014">click here</a> to download) </div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">$ Crime in India 2012, National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a> </div> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"># Torture in India 2011, Asian Centre for Human Rights,</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf</a> </p> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="/upload/files/ANNI%20Report%202020%20on%20the%20Performance%20of%20National%20Human%20Rights%20Institutions%20released%20in%20December%202021.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]2020 ANNI Report on the Performance of National Human Rights Institutions (released in December 2021)[/inside], which was prepared by FORUM-ASIA and funded by Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Kindly <a href="/upload/files/ANNI-Summary_Pages_v2.pdf">click here</a> to access the Executive Summary of the 2020 ANNI [Asian NGO Network on National Human Rights Institutions] Report on the Performance of National Human Rights Institutions.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">---</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> The <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> titled '<a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">Extinguishing Law and Life</a>: <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">Police Killings and Cover-Up</a> <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">in the state of Uttar Pradesh</a>' examines the death of 18 young men in these 17 instances of alleged extrajudicial killings by UP police, which were investigated by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Spread across six districts in western Uttar Pradesh-UP, these killings took place between March 2017 and March 2018. The <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> evaluates the investigations and inquiries conducted in these 17 cases and examines the role of the investigating agency, Executive Magistrates, Judicial Magistrates, and the NHRC, to assess whether they complied with the existing legal framework. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">The <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> reveals gross violations of law, both procedural and substantive, by the investigating agency and the judicial magistrates, in investigating these killings. Independent bodies such as the NHRC and oversight mechanisms such as magisterial inquiries have failed to identify these violations of law and have ignored factual contradictions in the police version of events. Instead, they have routinely condoned the unconstitutional procedures followed by the police during these investigations. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> titled [inside]Extinguishing Law and Life: Police Killings and Cover-Up in the state of Uttar Pradesh (released in October 2021)[/inside], which has been prepared by Youth for Human Rights Documentation (YHRD), Citizens Against Hate (CAH) and People’s Watch, are as follows:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">1. Of the 17 cases analysed, in not one case has an FIR been registered against the police team that was involved in the killing. Instead, in all 17 cases, FIRs have been registered against the deceased victims on charges of attempted murder under section 307 IPC and other offenses.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">2. The FIRs registered against the deceased victims in each of the 17 cases claim an identical sequence of events leading to the killing – details of a spontaneous shoot­out between police officers and alleged criminals in which the police are fired upon, and then (in self­-defence) fire back, leading to the death of one of the alleged criminals, while his accomplice always manages to escape ­ raising doubts about the veracity of these claims.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">3. In violation of the guidelines of the NHRC and the Supreme Court in PUCL, in a majority of the cases, the initial investigation was conducted by a police officer from the same police station as the police team involved in the killing, often of the same rank as the senior-most person in the "encounter" team. In all these cases, the investigation was later transferred to another Police Station, almost as if to show compliance with PUCL guidelines.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">4. In all the cases studied in the <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a>, the investigations conducted by the ‘independent’ investigating team of a different police station were inadequate. These investigations accept the police version that they killed the victims in "self­-defence", even though the justification of self­-defence for murder has to be proved and determined through a judicial trial. The Police's defense cannot be presumed from the police version or confirmed through an investigation. No investigation was conducted on whether the use of force was necessary and proportionate. Factual inconsistencies and contradictions were also overlooked. These include –</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>a. Post­-mortem Reports show lethal force used: The bodies of 12 of the victims show multiple gunshot wounds on the torso, abdomen, and even on the head; some dead bodies also show fractures. Post-mortem Reports of five deceased victims show blackening and tattooing around the bullet entry wounds, indicating firing from close range. This contradicts the police claim that minimal force was used or that the bullets were aimed at the lower part of the victims’ bodies to immobilize them and ensure their arrest.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>b. Police only sustained minor injuries:­ Out of the approximate 280 police personnel involved in these 17 police killings, only around 20 police officers sustained injuries. In 15 out of the 17 cases analysed, the police sustained only minor injuries.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>c. Inadequate proof that the deceased or his accomplice were holding weapons or fired at the Police:­ In seven cases, the fingerprints of the deceased were not found on the weapons recovered from the scene of the crime. Therefore, the police’s claim that the victims used weapons to shoot at them is contradicted by the independent record.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>d. No evidence to suggest that retaliatory firing by police was necessary: There is an effort to present bulletproof jackets with bullets in them as proof that retaliatory firing was required. At least 16 bullet-proof jackets contain bullet entries. However, there is nothing to connect these bullets to the weapons that are claimed to have been recovered from the deceased. It has not even been conclusively shown that these bulletproof jackets were actually used in the purported “encounter”. In some cases, there is nothing to connect the bullet injuries sustained by the police to the weapons purportedly handled by the deceased.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">5. In 16 out of the 17 cases analysed, the investigating officer closed the investigation by filing Closure Reports in court before the Judicial Magistrates. Overlooking the factual contradictions that emerge from the evidence, the closure report in all the 16 cases confirms the police version that the firing was in self­-defence. All the cases were closed on the ground that the victims – who were named as an “accused” ­ were dead and that the police could not find any information about the accomplice who escaped the crime scene. This process has been held to be unconstitutional by the High Courts and the NHRC in other instances.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">6. In 11 out of 16 cases where a Closure Report was filed by the police, there appears to be an abdication of judicial powers by the Magistrate who has unquestioningly accepted the Closure of the investigation. By naming the deceased as "accused" in these cases, the requirement of the Court to issue notice to the victim's family before closing the case was done away with. Instead, Magistrates issued notice to the police officer, the complainant in the FIR, who in turn gives a “no objection” letter to close the investigation. Through this process, the Judicial Magistrates accept the closure of the investigation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">7. The law (Section 176(1­A) of the CrPC) requires an inquiry into the cause of death to be conducted by a Judicial Magistrate, however, in at least eight cases, the inquiries were conducted by an Executive Magistrate in violation of CrPC provisions. This violation also indicates that a lack of clarity in the PUCL guidelines is being taken advantage of to evade accountability. The Executive Magistrates held the police killings to be "genuine", acting well beyond their powers and jurisdiction, which is only to determine the cause of death and not determine whether an offense has been committed. The Executive Magistrates’ findings and reports are based on the police version, and most reports do not even consider forensic or ballistic evidence. The statements of family members have either not been recorded or recorded in a perfunctory manner.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">8. Three years after the NHRC directed an investigation into 17 cases detailed in this <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a>, 14 cases have been decided, two cases are still pending and the status of one case is not available in the public domain. Out of the 14 cases decided by the NHRC, 12 cases were closed, finding no foul play on the part of the police, and one case was transferred to the UP State Human Rights Commission. In only one case, the NHRC held that the deceased was killed in a ‘fake encounter’ by the police. The other inquiries by the NHRC overlook the factual contradictions and inconsistencies in the police narrative. It also turns a blind eye to violations of procedural and substantive law, for instance, the registration of all FIRs against the deceased victims and no FIRs against the police; closing the investigation on the grounds of the police version of self­-defence, no judicial determination of the justification of self­-defence, violations in the collection and securing of evidence from the scene of the crime, often done by police officers belonging to the same Police Station as the police involved in the killings.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">9. The burden of ensuring investigation and accountability falls entirely on the victims’ families. The families face intimidation, threats, and persecution through false and fabricated criminal cases. At least 13 letters have been submitted to the NHRC about the persecution by the state and non-­state actors of the victim families and human rights defenders providing legal aid and support to the families. The NHRC neither responded to nor took on record the letters pertaining to the persecution of victims’ families. It directed inquiries in cases of the persecution of human rights defenders but closed those inquiries as well.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">10. This <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> lays bare the abject failure of the criminal justice system to ensure accountability for police killings. It shows how the justice system is unable to hold police officers to account for use of force causing death. It exposes the ambiguities and gaps in the Supreme Court’s guidelines in PUCL v. State of Maharashtra, which is effectively translating, in practice, into impunity for killings. These include introducing ambiguity on FIRs to be registered against the police, introducing vagueness which allows the plea of self­-defence to be misused by the police and claimed at the stage of investigation instead of a trial, ambiguity regarding mandatory inquiry by a judicial magistrate into police killings, and the improbable expectation of a fair and independent investigation by the state police department into crimes by their own colleagues.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p>Kindly click <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/over-2-57-lakh-evicted-in-india-during-the-pandemic-21-people-evicted-from-their-homes-every-hour-says-new-report.html">here</a>, <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Forced_Evictions_2020%20report.pdf">here</a> and <a href="/upload/files/Key%20findings%20forced%20eviction%20report.jpg">here</a> to access the key findings of the report titled [inside]Forced Evictions in India in 2020: A Grave Human Rights Crisis During the Pandemic (released on 9th September, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p><strong>----</strong></p> <p>Please <a href="/upload/files/SPIR%202020-21%20Vol%20II%20%5BExecutive%20Summary%5D%20%28English%29.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Key takeaways of the Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume II): Policing in the Covid-19 Pandemic (released on 16 August, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p>Kindly <a href="/upload/files/SPIR%202020-2021%20Vol.%20II%20Policing%20in%20the%20Covid-19%20Pandemic.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume II): Policing in the Covid-19 Pandemic (released on 16 August, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">---</span></strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="/upload/files/SPIR%202020-21%20Vol%20I%20%28Key%20takeaways%29%20English.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Key takeaways of the Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume I): Policing in Conflict-Affected Regions (released on 19 April, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Kindly <a href="/upload/files/SPIR-2020-2021-Vol%20I%281%29.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume I): Policing in Conflict-Affected Regions (released on 19 April, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume I): Policing in Conflict-Affected Regions, gathers and evaluates original data on policing under extraordinary circumstances. It has been divided into two parts: First, a study of policing in conflict-affected areas and second, a study of policing during the Covid-19 pandemic. The studies present policy-oriented insights into the everyday working of the police in India. It is brought to you by Common Cause and the Lokniti Programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and is backed by our philanthropic partners, Tata Trusts and the Lal Family Foundation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The first part of the SPIR 2020- 21 is focused on districts and states affected by some form of conflict, extremism, or insurgency while the second part looks at the preparedness of the cops against disasters in general and health emergencies in particular. Both the studies combine perceptions and performance about policing, in essence, a continuation of the SPIR 2018 and 2019. The earlier reports were focused on citizens’ trust and satisfaction with the police and their adequacy, attitudes and working conditions.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The present study also surveys both the police personnel and common citizens using separate teams and questionnaires in different geographies. It is well-known that everything about policing at the conflict areas—from jurisdictions to the line of command—is affected by the presence of the Army or the para-military forces under stringent legal provisions. It is equally true that the presence of armed underground outfits changes the nature of politics and society in conflict areas. This report aims to understand how policing is carried out in disturbed areas and if there are any lessons in it for policymakers. The study also looks at how conflict situations affect normal crime, its investigation and resolution. It unravels the attitudes of police personnel, their working conditions, training and preparedness as also their relationships with various stakeholders of the conflict.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">For this study, a total of 6,881 individuals (2,276 police personnel and 4,605 civilians), across 27 districts in 11 states and Union Territories were surveyed. The conflict-affected districts were selected from amongst the list of disturbed areas provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs and where incidents of violence have been reported consistently in the presence of the Army or the paramilitary forces. The report also analyses official data released by government agencies.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">During 2020 at least 228 journalists (including two cases against media houses) were targeted. These included 12 female journalists who had faced physical violence, online harassment/ threats and cases including under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) of 1967. Please click <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020.pdf" title="/upload/files/India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020.pdf">here</a>, <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Press%20release%20India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf" title="/upload/files/Press%20release%20India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf">here</a> and <a href="http://www.rightsrisks.org/banner/india-press-freedom-report-2020/" title="http://www.rightsrisks.org/banner/india-press-freedom-report-2020/">here</a> to access the report titled [inside]India Press Freedom Report 2020 (released on 30th July, 2021)[/inside] by Rights and Risks Analysis Group (RRAG).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Kindly click <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Summary%20Media%E2%80%99s%20Crackdown%20During%20COVID-19%20Lockdown%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0kEM80fONm76qG47V-MWZxF8HNc8M3e0C37_LBJAjBP00QlqE4y03MRTU" title="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Summary%20Media%E2%80%99s%20Crackdown%20During%20COVID-19%20Lockdown%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0kEM80fONm76qG47V-MWZxF8HNc8M3e0C37_LBJAjBP00QlqE4y03MRTU">here</a> and <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Media%20Crackdown%20Report%20by%20Rights%20and%20Risks.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3t5uYxnwpCkhEqRqlwIMwW_Hf8OxxgPERRYzR6dV9UD_yHN5M6pDOTkVw" title="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Media%20Crackdown%20Report%20by%20Rights%20and%20Risks.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3t5uYxnwpCkhEqRqlwIMwW_Hf8OxxgPERRYzR6dV9UD_yHN5M6pDOTkVw">here</a> to access the main findings of the report titled [inside]India: Media’s Crackdown During COVID-19 Lockdown (released on 15th June, 2020)[/inside] by Rights and Risks Analysis Group (RRAG).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">---</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Standing%20Committee%20Report%20on%20The%20DNA%20Technology%20%28Use%20And%20Application%29%20Regulation%20Bill%2C%202019.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Parliamentary Standing Commmittee Report on The DNA Technology (Use And Application) Regulation Bill, 2019[/inside], which was presented to the Rajya Sabha on 3rd February, 2021 and laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on 3rd February, 2021. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Some of the key concerns, which have been raised about The DNA Technology (Use And Application) Regulation Bill, 2019, are as follows:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">1. Misuse of Sensitive DNA Information: can reveal extremely sensitive information about individuals [family ancestry (pedigree), skin colour, behaviour, illness, health status and susceptibility to diseases].</p> <p style="text-align:justify">2. Access to such intrusive information can be misused to specifically target individuals and their families using their genetic data. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">3. Can be misused for caste/ community-based profiling. Needless to say, DNA based profiling would amount to violation of human rights and it could also compromise the privacy of the individuals. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">4. The lawful and effective use of DNA technology is subject to its harnessing by trained and reliable officials and experts, making use of equipment, tools and technology, operational protocols and sampling methods. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">5. The integrity of the process is critical: Vulnerable to manipulation, mislabelling and contamination by accident or design. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">6. International best practices suggest that there must be an independent regulator of data to supervise and maintain checks on laboratory quality and examination of the crime scene and accordingly submit reports to the government. The Regulatory Body proposed here seems to meet the requirements, subject to appropriate checks and balances. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">7. Physical and cyber security of DNA Database-Bank/ security of a huge number of DNA profiles is critical. The Bill requires provisions for appropriate firewalls and cyber defence. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">8. Most importantly, protocols establishing a trusted chain of custody of samples, reliable and clearly defined processes for analysis, and proper use of expert evidence in court are critical to ensure their evidentiary value. Any gaps in chain of custody will cast suspicion on the integrity of the sample itself. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">9. Appropriate standards for laboratory quality assurance and crime scene examination need to be developed and published.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">The Supreme Court on 30th June, 2021 ordered the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to frame guidelines for payment of ex gratia compensation to family members of persons who succumbed to Covid-19. Kindly <a href="/upload/files/SC%20order%20on%20Ex%20Gratia%20compensation%20reepak-kansal-vs-union-of-india-ll-2021-sc-277-395793.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Supreme Court judgement dated 30th June 2021, which is related to the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 539 of 2021 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 554 of 2021[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please click <a href="https://www.im4change.org/latest-news-updates/eminent-individuals-oppose-the-appointment-of-justice-arun-mishra-as-chairperson-of-nhrc.html">here</a> and <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/PUCL%20final_press_note_2nd_june_NHRC_final.pdf">here</a> to access the [inside]Press release by People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) dated 2nd June, 2021[/inside] in which it opposed the appointment of Justice Arun Mishra as Chairperson of NHRC.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/Key%20takeaways.pdf">click here</a> and <a href="https://www.im4change.org/latest-news-updates/the-rule-of-law-is-indeed-backsliding-in-india-says-justice-madan-b-lokur.html">here</a> to access the key findings of the [inside]Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-2021, Volume-I[/inside], which is a study on policing in conflict-affected areas. Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/SPIR-2020-2021-Vol%20I.pdf">click here</a> to access the entire Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-2021, Volume-I, released on 19th April, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Kindly <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/INDIA-2020-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf" title="/upload/files/INDIA-2020-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]India 2020 Country Report on Human Rights Practices (released on 30th March, 2021)[/inside] by Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, United States Department of State.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Significant human rights issues included in the report: unlawful and arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings perpetrated by police; torture and cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by some police and prison officials; arbitrary arrest and detention by government authorities; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; political prisoners or detainees in certain states; restrictions on freedom of expression and the press, including violence, threats of violence, or unjustified arrests or prosecutions against journalists, use of criminal libel laws to prosecute social media speech, censorship, and site blocking; overly restrictive rules on nongovernmental organizations; restrictions on political participation; widespread corruption at all levels in the government; lack of investigation of and accountability for violence against women; tolerance of violations of religious freedom; crimes involving violence and discrimination targeting members of minority groups including women based on religious affiliation or social status; and forced and compulsory child labor, as well as bonded labor.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Despite government efforts to address abuses, a lack of accountability for official misconduct persisted at all levels of government, contributing to widespread impunity. Investigations and prosecutions of individual cases took place, but lax enforcement, a shortage of trained police officers, and an overburdened and underresourced court system contributed to a low number of convictions.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Separatist insurgents and terrorists in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, the Northeast, and Maoist-affected areas committed serious abuses, including killings and torture of armed forces personnel, police, government officials, and civilians, and recruitment and use of child soldiers.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The government continued taking steps to restore normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir by gradually lifting some security and communications restrictions. The government released most political activists from detention. In January the government partially restored internet access; however, high-speed 4G mobile internet remained restricted in most parts of Jammu and Kashmir. The government began a process to redraw electoral constituencies but did not announce a timeline for local assembly elections. Local district development council elections took place in December in which a coalition of Kashmiri opposition parties won the majority of seats.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/SASM2020-FullReport.pdf">click here</a> to access the report entitled [inside]The South Asia State of Minorities Report 2020: Minorities and Shrinking Civic Space (released in December 2020)[/inside] by the South Asia Collective.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/Press%20Release%20FINAL%20NCRB%20Analysis.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Analysis of Crime in India 2019 report[/inside] by National Coalition for Strengthening SCs and STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (NCSPA) and National Dalit Movement for Justice (NDMJ), dated 1st October, 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/SPIR%202019%20Press%20Release%2027082019%20-%20BW.pdf">click here</a> to access the key findings of the [inside] Status of Policing in India Report 2019[/inside]: Police Adequacy and Working Conditions, Common Cause and Lokniti Programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), Tata Trusts and Lal Family Foundation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Release%20Status%20of%20Policing%20in%20India%20Report%202018.pdf">click here</a> to access the key findings of the [inside] Status of Policing in India Report 2018[/inside]: A Study of Performance and Perceptions, Common Cause, Lokniti Programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), Tata Trusts and Lal Family Foundation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">The judgement by Supreme Court judges Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit (dated 20 March, 2018, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/22086_2017_Judgement_20-Mar-2018.pdf" title="SC ST Act judgement">click here</a> to access) pertaining to Criminal Appeal No. 416 of 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5661 of 2017), among other things, says that:<br /> <br /> • In view of acknowledged abuse of law of arrest in cases under [inside]The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989)[/inside], arrest of a public servant can only be after approval of the appointing authority and of a non-public servant after approval by the Senior Superintendent of Police (S.S.P.) which may be granted in appropriate cases if considered necessary for reasons recorded. Such reasons must be scrutinized by the Magistrate for permitting further detention.<br /> <br /> • To avoid false implication of an innocent, a preliminary enquiry may be conducted by the D.S.P. concerned to find out whether the allegations make out a case under The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989) and that the allegations are not frivolous or motivated.<br /> <br /> • To avoid false implication, before a First Information Report (FIR) is registered, preliminary enquiry may be made (as mentioned above) whether the case falls in the parameters of The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989) and is not frivolous or motivated.<br /> <br /> • There is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989) if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny the complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">-- </p> <div style="text-align:justify">The press release by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment dated 25 January, 2016 (please <a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=135764">click here</a> to access) says that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 to ensure more stringent provisions for prevention of Atrocities against Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes will be enforced with effect from January 26, 2016.<br /> </div> <p style="text-align:justify">Consequent upon passing of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Bill, 2015 by the Lok Sabha on August 04,2015 and Rajya Sabha on December 21, 2015, to make amendments in the Principal Act, namely, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) {PoA} Act, 1989, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, as assented by the President on December 31, 2015, was notified in the Gazette of India Extraordinary on January 01, 2016. After framing the rules for enactment, now it will be enforced by the Central Government with effect from January 26, 2016.<br /> <br /> The key features of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (please <a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=135764">click here</a> to access), are:<br /> <br /> • New offences of atrocities like tonsuring of head, moustache, or similar acts which are derogatory to the dignity of members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, garlanding with chappals, denying access to irrigation facilities or forest rights , dispose or carry human or animal carcasses, or to dig graves, using or permitting manual scavenging, dedicating a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe women as devadasi, abusing in caste name, perpetrating witchcraft atrocities, imposing social or economic boycott, preventing Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates from filing of nomination to contest elections, hurting a Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes woman by removing her garments, forcing a member of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe to leave house , village or residence, defiling objects sacred to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe, touching or using words, acts or gestures of a sexual nature against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe.<br /> <br /> • Addition of certain IPC offences like hurt, grievous hurt, intimidation, kidnapping etc., attracting less than ten years of imprisonment, committed against members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, as offences punishable under the PoA Act. Presently, only those offences listed in IPC as attracting punishment of 10 years or more and committed on members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe are accepted as offences falling under the PoA Act.<br /> <br /> • Establishment of Exclusive Special Courts and specification of Exclusive Special Public Prosecutors also, to exclusively try the offences under the PoA Act to enable speedy and expeditious disposal of cases.<br /> <br /> • Power of Special Courts and Exclusive Special Courts, to take direct cognizance of offence and as far as possible, completion of trial of the case within two months, from the date of filing of the charge sheet.<br /> <br /> • Addition of chapter on the ‘Rights of Victims and Witnesses’.<br /> <br /> • Defining clearly the term ‘wilful negligence’ of public servants at all levels, starting from the registration of complaint, and covering aspects of dereliction of duty under this Act.<br /> <br /> • Addition of presumption to the offences –If the accused was acquainted with the victim or his family, the court will presume that the accused was aware of the caste or tribal identity of the victim unless proved otherwise.<br /> <br /> According to <u><span style="color:#0000ff">vikaspedia.in</span></u>, the key features of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (please <a href="http://vikaspedia.in/social-welfare/scheduled-caste-welfare-1/the-scheduled-castes-and-the-scheduled-tribes-prevention-of-atrocities-amendment-act-2015">click here</a> to access), are:<br /> <br /> • <strong>Actions to be treated as offences -</strong> The Act outlines actions (by non SCs and STs) against SCs or STs to be treated as offences. The Amendment Act amends certain existing categories and adds new categories of actions to be treated as offences. New offences added under the Act include: (a) garlanding with footwear, (b) compelling to dispose or carry human or animal carcasses, or do manual scavenging, (c) abusing SCs or STs by caste name in public, (d) attempting to promote feelings of ill-will against SCs or STs or disrespecting any deceased person held in high esteem, and (e) imposing or threatening a social or economic boycott.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Assaulting or sexual exploiting an SC or ST woman is an offence under the Act -</strong> The Amendment Act adds that: (a) intentionally touching an SC or ST woman in a sexual manner without her consent, or (b) using words, acts or gestures of a sexual nature, or (c) dedicating an SC or ST women as a devadasi to a temple, or any similar practice will also be considered an offence. Consent is defined as a voluntary agreement through verbal or non-verbal communication.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Preventing SCs or STs from undertaking the following activities will be considered an offence -</strong> (a) using common property resources, (c) entering any place of worship that is open to the public, and (d) entering an education or health institution.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Addition of presumption to the offences – </strong>The court shall presume that the accused was aware of the caste or tribal identity of the victim if the accused had personal knowledge of the victim or his family, unless the contrary is proved.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Role of public servants - </strong>The Act specifies that a non SC or ST public servant who neglects his/her duties relating to SCs or STs shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term of six months to one year. The Amendment Act specifies these duties, including: (a) registering a complaint or FIR, (b) reading out information given orally, before taking the signature of the informant and giving a copy of this information to the informant, etc.<br /> <br /> • Addition of certain IPC offences like hurt, grievous hurt, intimidation, kidnapping etc., attracting less than ten years of imprisonment, committed against members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, as offences punishable under the PoA Act. Presently, only those offences listed in IPC as attracting punishment of 10 years or more and committed on members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe are accepted as offences falling under the PoA Act.<br /> <br /> • Establishment of Exclusive Special Courts and specification of Exclusive Special Public Prosecutors also, to exclusively try the offences under the PoA Act to enable speedy and expeditious disposal of cases.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Rights of victims and witnesses -</strong> The Amendment Act adds a chapter on the rights of victims and witness. It shall be the duty of the state to make arrangements for the protection of victims, their dependants and witnesses. The state government shall specify a scheme to ensure the implementation of rights of victims and witnesses.<br /> <br /> • The courts established under the Act may take measures such as: (a) concealing the names of witnesses, (b) taking immediate action in respect of any complaint relating to harassment of a victim, informant or witness, etc. Any such complaint shall be tried separately from the main case and be concluded within two months.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="http://ncsc.nic.in/files/PoA%20Amendment%20Rules,%202016.pdf">click here</a> to access the Rules related to The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Amendment Act (2015). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/SCST%20Prevention%20of%20Atrocities%20Act%202015.pdf" title="SC ST Prevention of Atrocities Amendment Act 2015">click here</a> to access the The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Amendment Act (2015). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/poarules.pdf" title="PoA Rules SC ST">click here</a> to access the Rules related to The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/The%20Scheduled%20Caste%20and%20the%20Scheduled%20Tribes%20Prevention%20Of%20Atrocities%20Act%201989.pdf" title="The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes Prevention Of Atrocities Act 1989">click here</a> to access The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report entitled [inside]Crime in India 2016 Statistics (released in November, 2017)[/inside], which has been published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a> :<br /> <br /> <em>Human Rights Violation</em><br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of cases registered against police personnel for human rights violation was 209 in 2016. However, 73 cases were found to be false. The total number of police personnel charge-sheeted for human rights violation was 50 in that year. No police personnel was convicted for human rights violation in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The total number of criminal cases registered against police personnel during 2016 was 3082 at the national-level.<br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of deaths in police custody was 92 in 2016, out of which 8 can be attributed to injuries sustained during the police custody due to physical assault by police, 1 can be attributed to injuries sustained prior to police custody, 1 can be attributed to mob attack/ riots, 2 can be attributed to assault by other criminals, 38 can be attributed to suicide, 4 can be attributed to while escaping from police custody, 28 can be attributed to illness, 7 can be attributed to natural deaths, 1 can be attributed to road accident/ journey connected to investigation, and 2 can be attributed to other reasons.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) during 2016 was 60. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) during 2016 was 32. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2016 was 92 and 351, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2016 was 35 and 759, respectively.<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against women</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 55.2 in 2016, which was 54.2 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against women = (Incidences of Crimes against Women divided by Female Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Female Population<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime cases (IPC+SLL) against women in 2016, most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (14.5 percent), followed by West Bengal (9.6 percent), Maharashtra (9.3 percent) and Rajasthan (8.1 percent).<br /> <br /> • Among the states, the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women in 2016 has been the highest in Assam (131.3 crimes per lakh women population), followed by Odisha (84.5) and Telangana (83.7). Among the Union Territories (UTs), the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women has been the highest in Delhi UT (160.4 in 2016).<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been the highest in Sikkim (30.3), followed by Delhi UT (22.6) and Arunachal Pradesh (14.7). In 94.6 percent of rape cases (under Section 376 IPC and Section 376 IPC read with Section 4 & 6 of POCSO Act) during 2016, the offenders were known to the victims.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been 6.3 in 2016 at the national level. The number of such cases reported has been 38,947 in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The number of rape cases reported has increased by 12.4 percent from 34,651 cases in 2015 to 38,947 in 2016. Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh reported the highest incidence of rape with 4,882 cases (12.5 percent) and 4,816 (12.4 percent) respectively, followed by 4,189 such cases in Maharashtra (10.7 percent) during 2016.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to 'Assault on Women with intent to outrage her Modesty' has been 13.8 in 2016. The number of such cases reported has been 84,746 in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to 'Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives' has been 18.0 in 2016. The number of such cases reported has been 1,10,378 in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The cases under Crimes Against Women have reported an increase of 2.9 percent in 2016 (3,38,954) over 2015 (3,29,243). The majority of cases under crimes against women were reported under ‘Cruelty by Husband or His Relatives’ (32.6 percent), followed by ‘Assault on Women with Intent to Outrage her Modesty’ (25.0 percent), ‘Kidnaping & Abduction of Women’ (19.0 percent) and ‘Rape’ (11.5 percent).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against children</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has increased from 20.1 in 2014 to 21.1 in 2015 and further to 24.0 percent in 2016. The rate of total cognizable Crime against children = (Total Incidences of Crimes against children divided by Children Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Children Population<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in 2016 has been the highest in Delhi UT (146.0), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (61.4), Chandigarh (55.5) and Sikkim (55.0).<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported on infanticide has been the highest in Uttar Pradesh (21) followed by Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh (both 14) during 2016. The number of cases reported about foeticide has been the highest in Uttar Pradesh (52) followed by Rajasthan (21) and Madhya Pradesh (19) during 2016.<br /> <br /> • Crimes against children have shown an increasing trend over the past 3 years with a significant increase of 13.6 percent (1,06,958) in 2016 over (94,172) 2015. Kidnapping and abduction of children accounted for 52.3 percent of the cases, followed by cases reported under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act i.e. 34.4 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the total victims trafficked in 2016 (i.e. 15,379), nearly 58.7 percent victims (male: 4,123; female: 4,911) were below 18 years.<br /> <br /> • Most number of victims below 18 years who were trafficked in 2016 belonged to the state of West Bengal (3,113), followed by Rajasthan (2,519) and Uttar Pradesh (822)<br /> <br /> • Out of the total victims of rape in 2016 (i.e. 39,068), nearly 1.3 percent victims were below 6 years, 4.1 percent victims were 6 years & above but below 12 years, 15.6 percent victims were 12 years & above but below 16 Years, and 22.2 percent victims were 16 years & above but below 18 Years. It means that 43.2 percent of total rape victims in 2016 were aged below 18 years. <br /> <br /> <em>Crime against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in India has declined from 20.1 in 2014 to 19.2 in 2015 but increased to 20.3 in 2016. The rate of total cognizable Crime against SCs = (Total cases reported under crime against SCs divided by Total Population of SCs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of SCs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in 2016 has been the highest in Madhya Pradesh (43.4), followed by Rajasthan (42.0) and Goa (36.7).<br /> <br /> • The atrocities/ crime against Scheduled Castes have increased by 5.5 percent in 2016 (40,801) over 2015 (38,670).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against SCs in 2016, most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (25.6 percent), followed by Bihar (14.0 percent) and Rajasthan (12.6 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in India has fallen from 6.5 in 2014 to 6.0 in 2015 but increased to 6.3 percent in 2016. The rate of total cognizable Crime against STs = (Total cases reported under crime against STs divided by Total Population of STs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of STs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in 2016 has been the highest in Kerala (37.5), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (21.0) and Andhra Pradesh (15.4).<br /> <br /> • Atrocities/ Crime Against Scheduled Tribes have increased by 4.7 percent in 2016 (6,568) over 2015 (6,276).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against STs in 2016, most were committed in Madhya Pradesh (27.8 percent), followed by Rajasthan (18.2 percent) and Odisha (10.4 percent).<br /> <br /> <strong>Note:</strong><br /> <br /> • The National Crime Records Bureau follows ‘Principal Offence Rule’ for counting of crime. Hence among many offences covered in a single registered criminal case, only most heinous crime in the registered case has been considered as counting unit representing that case. Hence, there is likelihood of some Indian Penal Code (IPC)/ Special & Local Laws (SLL) cases getting under reported as they are hidden under major IPC crimes i.e. Murder with Rape is accounted as Murder & Dowry Prohibition Act when applied along with 304B of IPC will be counted as Dowry Death only.<br /> <br /> • The Principle Offence Rule is not applicable for chapters of Crimes against Women, Crimes Against Children, Crimes Against SC/ST, juveniles in conflict with law, crime against senior citizens etc.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Based on data and statistics from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD), the PRS Legislative Research has come out with a report. The key findings of the report entitled [inside]Police Reforms in India (June 2017)[/inside], which has been authored by Anviti Chaturvedi are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Police%20reforms%20in%20India.pdf" title="Police reforms in India ">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> • An expert committee under the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation has noted in its report (entitled <em>Report of the Committee on Crime Statistics</em>, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2012) that there is significant under-reporting of crimes under the NCRB for various reasons. For example, there could be suppression of data and low registration of crimes because the police know that their work is judged on the basis of this information. Also, sometimes victims of crime may decide against reporting the incident with the police because they are afraid to approach the police, or think the crime is not serious enough, etc. Also, note that the NCRB follows the ‘principal offence rule’ for counting crime. This means that if many offences are covered in a single registered criminal case, the NCRB will only count the most heinous of the offences. For instance, a case of murder and rape, will only be counted as a case of murder (i.e. principal offence) by the NCRB.<br /> <br /> • Police personnel discharge a range of functions related to: (i) crime prevention and response (e.g., intelligence collection, patrolling, investigation, production of witnesses in courts), (ii) maintenance of internal security and law and order (e.g., crowd control, riot control, anti-terrorist or anti-extremist operations), and (iii) various miscellaneous duties (e.g., traffic management, disaster rescue and removal of encroachments). Each police officer is also responsible for a large segment of people, given India’s low police strength per lakh population as compared to international standards. While the United Nations recommended standard is 222 police per lakh persons, India’s sanctioned strength is 181 police per lakh persons. After adjusting for vacancies, the actual police strength in India is at 137 police per lakh persons. Therefore, an average policeman ends up having an enormous workload and long working hours, which negatively affects his efficiency and performance.<br /> <br /> • In 2015, the National Crime Records Bureau recorded over 73 lakh complaints of cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to investigate, such as murder and rape. Between 2005 and 2015, crime rate (i.e., crime per lakh population) for cognizable crimes has increased by 28% from 456 complaints per lakh persons to 582 per lakh persons. This has been primarily because of increase in crime rates of alcohol-prohibition crime, theft, kidnapping and abduction, crimes against women and cheating.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to the report entitled [inside]Crime in India 2015 Statistics (released in 2016)[/inside], which has been published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a> :<br /> <br /> <em>Human Rights Violation</em><br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of cases registered against State Police and Central Paramilitary Forces for human rights violation was 94 in 2015. However, 12 cases were found to be false. The total number of police personnel charge-sheeted for human rights violation was 34 in that year. No police personnel was convicted for human rights violation in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The total number of criminal cases registered against police personnel during 2015 was 5526 at the national-level. It must be noted that the complaints against police personnel exclude human rights violation by police but these crime may be related to family/ domestic complaints, etc.<br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of deaths in police custody was 97 in 2015, out of which 6 can be attributed to injuries sustained during the police custody due to physical assault by police, 6 can be attributed to injuries sustained prior to police custody, 1 can be attributed to mob attack/ riots, 3 can be attributed to assault by other criminals, 34 can be attributed to suicide, 5 can be attributed to while escaping from police custody, 11 can be attributed to illness, 9 can be attributed to natural deaths, 1 can be attributed to road accident/ journey connected to investigation, 12 can be attributed to hospitalization and 9 can be attributed to other reasons.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) during 2015 was 67. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) during 2015 was 30. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2015 was 42 and 39, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2015 was 7 and 298, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The number of civilians killed and injured by terrorists or militants during 2015 was 19 and 67, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The number of civilians killed and injured by Naxalites or Left-Wing Extremists during 2015 was 11 and 23, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The number of civilians killed and injured during riots in 2015 were 6 and 292, respectively.<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against women</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 53.9 in 2015, which was 56.3 in 2014. The rate of total cognizable Crime against women = (Incidences of Crimes against Women divided by Female Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Female Population<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against women, in 2015 most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (10.9 percent), followed by West Bengal (10.1 percent), Maharashtra (9.5 percent) and Rajasthan (8.6 percent).<br /> <br /> • Among the states, the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women in 2015 has been the highest in Assam (148.2 crimes per lakh women population), followed by Telengana (83.1), Odisha (81.9) and Rajasthan (81.5). Among the Union Territories (UTs), the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women has been the highest in Delhi UT (184.3 in 2015, which was 169.1 in 2014). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been the highest in Delhi UT (23.7), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (13.5) and Chhattisgarh (12.2). In 95.5 percent of rape cases (under Section 376 IPC) during 2015, the offenders were known to the victims.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has gone up from 3.5 in 2004 to 6.1 in 2014 but declined marginally to 5.7 in 2015. The number of cases reported about such crime has almost doubled from 18,233 in 2004 to 34,651 in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to Assault on women with intent to outrage her Modesty has gone up from 6.6 in 2004 to 13.7 in 2014 but declined marginally to 13.6. The number of cases reported about such crime has more than doubled from 34,567 in 2004 to 82,422 in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives has almost doubled from 11.1 in 2004 to 20.5 in 2014 but fell marginally to 18.7 in 2015. The number of cases reported about such crime has increased from 58,121 in 2004 to 1,22,877 in 2014 but declined to 1,13,403 in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported about the crime of Insult to Modesty of Women (Section 509 IPC) at Office Premises has been the highest in Delhi UT (36), followed by Telengana (32) and Maharashtra (27).<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported about the crime of Insult to Modesty of Women (Section 509 IPC) in Public Transport System has been the highest in Telengana (179) followed by Maharashtra (28).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against children</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has increased from 20.1 in 2014 to 21.1 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against children = (Total Incidences of Crimes against children divided by Children Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Children Population<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in 2015 has been the highest in Delhi UT (169.4), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (75), Chandigarh (67.8) and Mizoram (50.1).<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported about infanticide has been highest in Madhya Pradesh (25) followed by Rajasthan (18) during 2015. The number of cases reported about foeticide has been the highest in Madhya Pradesh (17), followed by Haryana (14) and Rajasthan (13) during 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> • In 94.8 percent of rape cases (under Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act) during 2015, the offenders were known to the raped child victims.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> <em>Crime against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in India has declined from 23.4 in 2014 to 22.3 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against SCs = (Total cases reported under crime against SCs divided by Total Population of SCs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of SCs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in 2015 has been the highest in Rajasthan (57.3), followed by Andhra Pradesh (52.3) and Goa (51.1).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against SCs, in 2015 most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (18.6 percent), followed by Rajasthan (15.6 percent) and Bihar (14.3 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in India has fallen from 11.0 in 2014 to 10.5 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against STs = (Total cases reported under crime against STs divided by Total Population of STs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of STs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in 2015 has been the highest in Kerala (36.3) followed by Rajasthan (34.7) and Andhra Pradesh (27.3).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against STs, in 2015 most were committed in Rajasthan (29.4 percent), followed by Madhya Pradesh (14 percent) and Chhattisgarh (13.9 percent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Note: </strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> • The National Crime Records Bureau follows ‘Principal Offence Rule’ for counting of crime. Hence among many offences covered in a single registered criminal case, only most heinous crime in the registered case has been considered as counting unit representing that case.<br /> <br /> • The Socio-economic causative factors or reasons of crimes are not being captured by the NCRB. Only police registered criminal cases are being captured for this publication.<br /> <br /> • Analysis of crimes in all the chapters in this report has been done on the basis of First Information Report (FIR), as registered by police.<br /> <br /> • In some crime heads, figures of persons arrested/ charge-sheeted/ convicted/etc. may be less than the corresponding registered cases, as accused might not have been arrested or died etc.<br /> <br /> • For some crime heads, cases/ persons pending for investigation or trials brought forward in 2015 may not match with the previous year data (2014), due to change/ modification of sections of that crime heads under the revised proformae.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report entitled [inside]Crime in India 2014 by National Crime Records Bureau (released in 2015)[/inside], <a href="http://www.ncrb.nic.in">www.ncrb.nic.in</a>: <br /> <br /> <em>Crime against women*</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 56.3.<br /> <br /> • Most crimes against women in 2014 were committed in Uttar Pradesh (11.4 percent), followed by West Bengal (11.3 percent), Rajasthan (9.2 percent), Madhya Pradesh (8.5 percent) and Maharashtra (7.9 percent).<br /> <br /> • Among the states, the rate of total cognizable crimes against women in 2014 has been the highest in Assam (123.4 crimes per lakh women population), followed by Rajasthan (91.4), Tripura (88) and West Bengal (85.4). Among the Union Territories (UTs), the rate of total cognizable crimes against women has been the highest in Delhi UT (169.1). <br /> <br /> • The rate of crime relating to rape has gone up from 3.5 in 2004 to 6.1 in 2014. The incidence of such crime has almost doubled from 18,233 in 2004 to 36,735 in 2014.<br /> <br /> • In 2014, most victims of incest rape were in the age group 12-16 years (29.6 percent), followed by the age group 18-30 years (28.5 percent). Incest Rape include rape by blood relatives like Grandfather/ Father/ Brother/ Son etc. In 2014, most victims of rape (also includes incest rape) were in the age group 18-30 years (43.8 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of crime relating to Assault on women with intent to outrage her Modesty has gone up from 6.6 in 2004 to 13.7 in 2014. The incidence of such crime has increased from 34,567 in 2004 to 82,235 in 2014.<br /> <br /> • The rate of crime relating to Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives has almost doubled from 11.1 in 2004 to 20.5 in 2014. The incidence of such crime has increased from 58,121 in 2004 to 1,22,877 in 2014.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime relating to human trafficking in 2014 has been the highest in Daman & Diu (2.6), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (2.2). Among states, the rate of total cognizable crime in human trafficking has been highest Haryana and Assam (both 1.3), followed by West Bengal & Goa (both 1.2).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against children</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has been 20.1.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in 2014 has been the highest in Delhi UT (166.9), followed by Goa (63.5). <br /> <br /> • The incidence of infanticide has been the highest in Rajasthan (33) during 2014. The incidence of foeticide has been the highest in Madhya Pradesh (30), followed by Rajasthan (24).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in India has been 23.4.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in 2014 has been the highest in Goa (66.8), followed by Rajasthan (65.7).<br /> <br /> • Most crimes against SCs in 2014 were committed in Uttar Pradesh (17.2 percent), followed by Rajasthan (17.1 percent) and Bihar (16.8 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in India has been 11.0.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in 2014 has been the highest in Rajasthan (42.8), followed by Kerala (27.8), Andaman & Nicobar Islands (24.5) and Andhra Pradesh (23.8).<br /> <br /> • Most crimes against STs in 2014 were committed in Rajasthan (34.5 percent), followed by Madhya Pradesh (19.9 percent), Odisha (11 percent) and Chhattisgarh (6.3 percent).<br /> <br /> <strong>Note: </strong><br /> <br /> * Crime rate against a particular community is the ratio of total number of crimes committed or reported in a year against that community to the population of that community (in lakhs). It is calculated to compare crime rates across various regions and also for inter-temporal comparison.<br /> <br /> Crime rate for crime against women, crime against children, crime against SCs/STs and crime senior citizens have been calculated using population of female, children (upto 18 years), SCs/STs and persons(60 years & above of age). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report [inside]Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2014[/inside] by United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), (please <a href="http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/glotip/GLOTIP_2014_full_report.pdf">click here</a> to access the report):<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Indian Scenario</em></strong><br /> <br /> • A bit more than 40% of the persons investigated for trafficking in persons in India were females.<br /> <br /> • India has detected victims from other countries in the subregion, particularly Nepal and Bangladesh. Victims trafficked from other areas– for example Eastern Europe - have also been detected in India, but only sporadically.<br /> <br /> • Victims from a variety of countries in South-East Asia and the Indian sub-continent are trafficked mainly to the Gulf and other Middle Eastern countries.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Global Scenario</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The present report's data covers the period 2010-2012. Girls make up 2 out of every 3 child victims. And together with women, they account for 70% of overall trafficking victims worldwide.<br /> <br /> • There has been a rise in the share of girl children in the total number of detected victims from 10% in 2004 to 21% in 2011. Similarly, the share of boy children in the total number of detected victims increased from 3% in 2004 to 12% in 2011. However, the share of adult women in the total number of detected victims fell from 74% in 2004 to 49% in 2011.<br /> <br /> • The share of the total number of detected victims who were trafficked for forced labour has increased from 32% in 2007 to 40% in 2011.<br /> <br /> • Between 2010 and 2012, victims with 152 different citizenships were identified in 124 countries across the globe. Moreover, trafficking flows - imaginary lines that connect the same origin country and destination country of at least five detected victims – criss-cross the world. UNODC has identified at least 510 flows.<br /> <br /> • Most victims of trafficking in persons are foreigners in the country where they are identified as victims. In other words, these victims - more than 6 in 10 of all victims - have been trafficked across at least one national border. That said, many trafficking cases involve limited geographic movement as they tend to take place within a subregion (often between neighbouring countries).<br /> <br /> • Domestic trafficking is widely detected, and for one in three trafficking cases, the exploitation takes place in the victim’s country of citizenship.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 49% of detected victims are adult women. Almost 33% of detected victims are children, which is a 5% increase compared to the 2007-2010 period.<br /> <br /> • Trafficking for forced labour - including in the manufacturing and construction sectors, domestic work and textile production - has increased steadily in the past five years. About 35% of the detected victims of trafficking for forced labour are female.<br /> <br /> • No country is immune to trafficking- there are at least 152 countries of origin and 124 countries of destination affected by trafficking in persons, and over 510 trafficking flows criss-crossing the world.<br /> <br /> • Most trafficking flows are interregional, and more than 6 out of 10 victims have been trafficked across at least one national border. The vast majority of convicted traffickers - 72% - are male and citizens of the country in which they operate. Some 64% of convicted traffickers are citizens of the convicting country.<br /> <br /> • There are regional variations as to why people are trafficked in the first place. For example, victims in Europe and Central Asia are mostly trafficked for sexual exploitation, whereas in East Asia and the Pacific forced labour drives the market. In the Americas, the two types are detected in almost equal measure. In some regions - such as Africa and the Middle East - child trafficking is a major concern, with children constituting 62% of victims. In Asia, most of the victims of trafficking for forced labour were women.<br /> <br /> • More than 90% of countries have legislation criminalizing human trafficking since the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, under the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, came into force more than a decade ago.<br /> <br /> • Despite this, impunity remains a serious problem: 40% of countries recorded few or no convictions, and over the past 10 years there has been no discernible increase in the global criminal justice response to this crime, leaving a significant portion of the population vulnerable to offenders.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">For the report Elder Abuse in India (2014), the research pans 12 cities across 8 states with a sample size of 1,200 elders covering both metro (Tier I) and non- metro (Tier II) cities. The report was done to determine the existence of elder abuse, reasons for its occurrence, its extent and what as per elderly were the most effective measures to deal with the problem.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report entitled [inside]Elder Abuse in India (2014)[/inside] by HelpAge India (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Elder%20Abuse%20in%20India%202014.pdf" title="Elder Abuse India 2014">click here</a> to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 2014 the percentage of elders abused went up drastically from 23% in the previous year to 50%.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The elderly victims cite that the primary reasons underlying their abuse are emotional dependence on the abuser (46%), economic dependence on the abuser (45%) and changing ethos (38%).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Verbal Abuse (41%), Disrespect (33%) and Neglect (29%) are ranked as the most common types of abuse experienced by the elderly. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Elders across cities were asked about the abusers within their family. The Daughter-in-law (61%) and Son (59%) emerged as the topmost perpetrators. This is a trend that is continuing from the previous years. Not surprisingly, 77% of those surveyed, live with their families.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Though the national capital of Delhi ranked the lowest in elder abuse with 22 per cent amongst Tier I cities, it also indicated a marginal increase of the same from 20 per cent last year, showing a slow but disturbing growth. Bengaluru ranked the highest at 75 per cent among Tier I cities surveyed, while in the Tier II cities Kanpur was the lowest (13 per cent) and Nagpur highest at 85 per cent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Women seemed to be more vulnerable with 52% of them facing abuse as against 48% of the men surveyed. The report said that while the abuse has gone up, 41% of those abused did not report the matter to anyone.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• An interesting observation about the Reasons for Not Reporting abuse, is that in Metro cities there is marked ‘lack of confidence in the any person or agency to deal with the problem’ and also there seems to be a general feeling of “did not know how to deal with the abuse”. However “Fear of retaliation” appears in 3 out of 6 Tier II cities, unlike the Tier I cities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• All elders surveyed seemed most aware of the police helpline at 67%. In the case of victims the awareness level continues to be high at 64% but only 12% approached the police.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Nationally, the effective mechanisms perceived by all elderly to deal with Elder Abuse include “increasing economic independence of the abused (30%)”, “sensitizing children and strengthening inter-generational bonding (21%)” and “developing Self-Help-Groups of Older Persons to provide assistance and intervention (14%).”</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Many victims both in Tier I & Tier II cities pointed out “Developing an effective legal reporting & redressal system” is an important step for effectively dealing with Elder Abuse.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">[inside]Independent People's Tribunal on the functioning of the National Human Rights Commission[/inside] </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/IPT%20-%20NHRC%20-%20Interim%20observations%20HPT%20Final.pdf">click here</a> to access the Interim observations and recommendation of Jury Panel of the <a href="https://im4change.org/events/independent-peoples-tribunal-on-the-functioning-of-the-national-human-rights-commission-23636.html">Independent People's Tribunal</a> on the Functioning of the NHRC of India. The event took place in School of Social Sciences-1 Auditorium, Jawaharlal Nehru University on 14th, 15th& 16th December 2013.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">On 15th December, 2013 Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) made a submission to the Independent People's Tribunal that was hearing people's perceptions about the working of the National Human Rights Commission on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Protection of Human Rights Act, which provides for the establishment of the NHRC to look into complaints of human rights violations suffered by people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/CHRI-RTIusersattacks-IPTsubmission-Dec13-Delhi-VNayak.pdf">click here</a> to download the CHRI's submission relating to Attacks on Users and Activists of the Right to Information in India and Role of the National Human Rights Commission.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Also, <a href="tinymce/uploaded/RTI-ListofAttacks-Nov13_1.xls" title="RTI List of attacks">click here</a> to access the List of RTI Activists and Users Murdered / Attacked / Harassed in India.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Crime in India 2012[/inside] published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a>:<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Women</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of crimes committed against women increased from 2,28,650 in 2011 to 2,44,270 in 2012.<br /> <br /> • West Bengal reported 12.7% of total such cases in the country (30,942 out of 2,44,270). Assam reported the highest crime rate (89.5) as compared to the National average rate of 41.7.<br /> <br /> • The proportion of IPC crimes committed against women under total IPC crimes has increased during last 5 years from 8.9% in the year 2008 to 9.4% during the year 2012.<br /> <br /> • Madhya Pradesh has reported the highest number of Rape cases (3,425), Assault on Women with intent to outrage her modesty (6,655) and Importation of Girls from foreign country (59) accounting for 13.7%, 14.6% and 10.1% respectively of total such cases reported in the country.<br /> <br /> • Andhra Pradesh has reported 40.5% (3,714) of Insult to the modesty of Women cases.<br /> <br /> • Highest cases of Kidnapping & Abduction 20.7% (7,910) and Dowry Deaths 27.3% (2,244) were reported in Uttar Pradesh.<br /> <br /> • Offenders were known to the victims in 98.2% of Rape cases (24,470 out of 24,915).<br /> <br /> • A total of 36,622 cases of crime against women were reported from 53 mega cities out of 2,44,270 cases reported in the country during 2012. The rate of crime in these cities at 47.76 was comparatively higher as compared to national rate at 41.74<br /> <br /> • Among 53 mega cities, Delhi (City) accounted for 14.2% (5,194) of such crimes followed by Bengaluru 6.2% (2,263) and Kolkata 5.7% (2,073).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Children</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of crimes committed against children increased from 33,098 in 2011 to 38,172 in 2012<br /> <br /> • An increase of 15.3% was reported in incidence of crime against children in 2012 over 2011.<br /> <br /> • Percentage distribution of crime against children w.r.t. all India figures for the year 2012 was Uttar Pradesh (15.8%), Madhya Pradesh (13.5%), Delhi (11.7%), Maharashtra (9.5%), Bihar (7.6%), Andhra Pradesh (5.9%), Chhattisgarh (4.9%), Rajasthan (4.7%), West Bengal (4.4%) and Gujarat (3.5%).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Human Trafficking</em></strong><br /> <br /> • An increase of 1.1% in human trafficking incidence was observed (3,554 cases in 2012 as compared to 3,517 in 2011).<br /> <br /> • 44.4% of decrease of cases of ‘Buying of Girls for Prostitution’ was reported during 2012 over 2011.<br /> <br /> • Cases under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act increased by 5.2% (from 2,435 in 2011 to 2,563 in 2012). Tamil Nadu (500 cases) followed by Andhra Pradesh (472 cases) reported the highest incidence of 19.5% and 18.4% respectively of total cases (2,563) under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes</em></strong><br /> <br /> • Uttar Pradesh reported 18.4% of total crimes against Scheduled Castes (6,202 out of 33,655) and Rajasthan reported 22.8% of total (1,351 out of 5,922) crimes against Scheduled Tribes in the country during the year 2012.<br /> <br /> • Rajasthan reported the highest rate of crime (45.5) against Scheduled Castes as compared to the National average of 16.7. Kerala reported the highest rate of crime against Scheduled Tribes (25.6) as compared to the National average of 5.7.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Police and Human Rights</em></strong><br /> <br /> • 57,363 complaints were reported against police personnel during the year 2012, out of which 2,289 cases were registered and 42 police personnel were convicted.<br /> <br /> • 205 cases of Human Rights Violation by Police were reported during 2012 out of which 19 were charge-sheeted. The highest number of Human Rights Violation by Police was reported in Assam (102 cases)<br /> <br /> • 109 Custodial Deaths were reported in the country. 7 policemen were charge sheeted and no policeman was convicted during the year. 1 case of Custodial Rape was reported in the country. 24 cases of custodial deaths were on account of suicide<br /> <br /> • Total number of police firing was reported on 548 occasions during 2012.<br /> <br /> • Maximum casualties of civilians were observed in unspecified (other) events (31) and maximum casualties of policemen were observed in Anti Extremists & Terrorist Operations (37).<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Crime in India 2011[/inside] published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a>:<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Women</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against women stood at 2,28,650 in 2011 while the same stood at 2,13,585 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • West Bengal reported 12.7% of total such cases in the country (29,133 out of 2,28,650). Tripura reported the highest crime rate (37.0) as compared to the National average rate of 18.9.<br /> <br /> • The proportion of IPC crimes committed against women towards total IPC crimes has increased during last 5 years from 8.8% in the year 2007 to 9.4% during the year 2011.<br /> <br /> • Madhya Pradesh has reported the highest number of Rape cases (3,406), Molestation (6,665) and Importation of Girls (45) accounting for 14.1%, 15.5% and 56.3% respectively of total such cases reported in the country.<br /> <br /> • Andhra Pradesh has reported 42.7% (3,658) of Sexual Harassment cases.<br /> <br /> • Highest cases of Kidnapping & Abduction 21.2% (7,525) and Dowry Deaths 26.9% (2,322) were reported in Uttar Pradesh.<br /> <br /> • A total of 33,789 cases of crime against women were reported from 53 mega cities out of 2,28,650 cases reported in the country during 2011.<br /> <br /> • Among 53 cities, Delhi (City) accounted for 13.3% (4,489) of total crimes against women followed by Bengaluru-5.6% (1,890) and Hyderabad-5.5% (1,860).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Children</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against children stood at 33098 in 2011 while the same stood at 26694 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • An increase of 24.0% was reported in incidence of crime against Children in 2011 over 2010.<br /> <br /> • Percentage distribution of crime against children w.r.t. all India figures for the year 2011 was Uttar Pradesh (16.6%), Madhya Pradesh (13.2%), Delhi (12.8%), Maharashtra (10.2%), Bihar & Andhra Pradesh (6.7% each), Chhattisgarh (5.4%), Rajasthan (4.5%), West Bengal (4.4%) and Gujarat (3.4%).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Human Trafficking</em></strong><br /> <br /> • 2.8% increase in human trafficking incidence was observed in 3,517 cases in 2011 as compared to 3,422 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • 122.2% of increase of cases of ‘Importation of Girls’ was reported during 2011 over 2010.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against SCs stood at 33719 in 2011 while the same stood at 32712 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against STs stood at 5756 in 2011 while the same stood at 5885 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • Uttar Pradesh reported 22.8% of total crimes against Scheduled Castes (7,702 out of 33,719) and Madhya Pradesh reported 22.3% of total (1,284 out of 5,756) crimes against Scheduled Tribes in the country during the year 2011.<br /> <br /> • Rajasthan reported the highest rate of crime (7.6) against Scheduled Castes as compared to the National average of 2.8. Arunachal Pradesh reported the highest rate of crime against Scheduled Tribes (2.5) as compared to the National average of 0.5.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Police and Human Rights</em></strong><br /> <br /> • 61,765 complaints were reported against police personnel during the year 2011, out of which 11,171 cases were registered and 47 police personnel were convicted.<br /> <br /> • 72 cases of Human Right Violation by Police were reported during 2011 out of which 46 were charge-sheeted. The highest number of Human Right Violation by Police was reported in Delhi (50 cases)<br /> <br /> • 104 Custodial Deaths were reported in the country. 14 policemen were charge sheeted and no policeman was convicted during the year. 1 case of Custodial Rape was reported in the country. 33 cases of custodial deaths were reported by suicide.<br /> <br /> • Total number of police firing was reported in 482 occasions during 2011.<br /> <br /> • Maximum casualties of civilians were observed in unspecified (other) events (40) and maximum casualties of policemen were observed in Anti Extremists & Terrorist Operation (55).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the report titled [inside]Torture in India 2011[/inside], which has been brought out by Asian Centre for Human Rights, <a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In the last three years, 2,044 cases of police torture were registered to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). These included 574 cases in 2008-2009, 615 cases in 2009-2010 and 855 cases in 2010-2011. The statistics has gone up every year. However, these cases are only a fraction. Majority of the cases go unreported. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• From 2001 to 2010, the NHRC recorded 14,231 deaths in police and judicial custody in India. This includes 1,504 deaths in police custody and 12,727 deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC recorded 1504 deaths in police custody during 2001-2010 which includes 165 deaths in 2001-2002; 183 deaths in 2002-2003; 162 deaths in 2003-2004; 136 deaths in 2004-2005; 139 deaths in 2005-2006; 119 deaths in 2006-2007; 187 deaths in 2007-2008; 142 deaths in 2008-2009; 124 deaths in 2009-2010 and 147 deaths in 2010-2011.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Maharashtra recorded the highest number of deaths in police custody with 250 deaths during 2001-2010; followed by Uttar Pradesh (174); Gujarat (134); Andhra Pradesh (109); West Bengal (98); Tamil nadu (95); Assam (84); Karnataka (67); Punjab (57); Madhya Pradesh (55); Haryana (45); Bihar (44); Kerala (42); Jharkhand (41); Rajasthan (38); Orissa (34); Delhi (30); Chhattisgarh (24); Uttarakhand (20); Meghalaya (17); Arunachal Pradesh (10); Tripura (8); Jammu and Kashmir (6); Himachal Pradesh (5); Goa, Chandigarh and Pondicherry (3 each); Manipur, Mizoram and nagaland (2 each); and sikkim and Dadra and Nagar Haveli (1 each).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• During 2010-2011, the highest number of death in police custody was reported from Maharashtra with 31 cases followed by Uttar Pradesh (15); Andhra Pradesh (14); Gujarat (9); Assam and Orissa (7 each); Bihar, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Jharkhand (6 each); Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal (5 each); Uttarakhand (4); Delhi and Haryana (3 each); Goa, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Manipur, Mizoram and Rajasthan (2 each); and Nagaland, Tripura and Chhattisgarh (1 each).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC also recorded 12,727 deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-10. These included 1,140 cases in 2001-2002; 1,157 cases in 2002-2003; 1,300 cases in 2003-2004; 1,357 cases in 2004-2005; 1,591 cases in 2005-2006; 1,477 cases in 2006-2007; 1,789 cases in 2007-2008; 1,532 cases in 2008-2009; 1,389 cases in 2009-2010 upto 28 February 2010. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Uttar Pradesh recorded the highest number of deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-10 with 2171 deaths, followed by Bihar (1512); Maharashtra (1176); Andhra Pradesh (1037); Tamil Nadu (744); Punjab (739); West Bengal (601); Jharkhand (541); Madhya Pradesh (520); Karnataka (496); Rajasthan (491); Gujarat (458); Haryana (431); Orissa (416); Kerala (402); Chhattisgarh (351); Delhi (224); Assam (165); Uttarakhand (91); Himachal Pradesh (29); Tripura (26); Meghalaya (24); Chandigarh (23); Goa (18); Arunachal Pradesh (9); Pondicherry (8); Jammu and Kashmir and Nagaland (6 each); Mizoram (4); sikkim and Andaman and Nicober Island (3 each); and Manipur and Dadra and Nagar Haveli (1 each).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• On 9 March 2010, Mr Ajay Maken, then Minister of state in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India stated in the Lok Sabha that the NHRC recommended monetary relief of Rs 5,59,45,000 to the next of kin of the deceased in 386 cases of custodial death/rape across the country from 1 April 2006 to 28 February 2010. These included Rs. 1,62,5000 in 19 cases in 2006-2007; Rs. 1,16,75,000 in 82 cases in 2007-2008; Rs. 2,05,75,000 in 144 cases in 2008-2009; and Rs. 2,20,70,000 in 141 cases in 2009-2010 up to 28 February 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC registered only a total of the 25 cases of death in the custody of the military/ para-military forces from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010 up to 28 February 2010. These included 2 cases in 2001-02; nil cases in 2002-2003; 1 case in 2003-2004; 7 in 2004-2005; 4 in 2005-2006; 1 case in 2006-2007; 4 cases in 2007-2008; 4 cases in 2008-2009; and 2 cases in 2009-2010 upto 28 February 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report titled: [inside]Second Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the Country by NHRC (2011)[/inside], <a href="http://www.nhrc.nic.in/Reports/UPR-Final%20Report.pdf">http://www.nhrc.nic.in/Reports/UPR-Final%20Report.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Civil and political rights</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 35% of the complaints to the NHRC annually are against the police. In 2006 the Supreme Court issued seven binding directives to start reform, but little has been done, though the need is urgent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 9% of the complaints to the NHRC in 2010-11 were on inaction by officials or their abuse of power, confirming that laws are often not implemented or ignored.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Custodial justice remained a problem. Jails are overcrowded and unhygienic, disease rampant and treatment poor. 67% of prisoners are under trial, either unable to raise bail or confined far longer than they should be because of the huge backlog of cases.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There are inordinate delays in the provision of justice. 56,383 cases were pending in the Supreme Court at the end of October 2011. At the end of 2010, 4.2 million cases were pending in High Courts, and almost 28 million in subordinate courts.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The degrading practice of manual scavenging festers on. Some States are in denial over this. The Indian Railways are the largest users of manual scavengers.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Economic, social and cultural rights</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• A massive public distribution system has not assured the right to food because malnutrition is endemic. The National Advisory Council has recommended that legal entitlements to subsidized foodgrains be extended to at least 75% of the population. This is not acceptable to the Government, which sets arbitrary ceilings on the numbers who can be declared as being below the poverty line.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The official estimate that 27.5% of the population was below the poverty line in 2004-05 grossly understates the incidence of poverty. The expert committee set up by the Planning Commission put the figure at 37.2%. Other committees set up by Ministries peg it even higher.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Over 90% of the workforce is in the unorganized sector, has no access to social security, is particularly vulnerable in the cities, and is therefore driven into permanent debt, often leading to conditions of bonded labour.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme guaranteed 100 days of work a year to any rural household that needed it. Government data showed that 56 million households applied, 55 million were given work but on average received half the wages guaranteed. The Scheme has not therefore made enough of an impact, very large sums of money have been siphoned off, and it does not provide long-term employment or build permanent assets.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Public spending on health continues to be abysmally low, at about 1% of GDP, despite Government's commitment to raise it to 2-3%. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The current National Family Health Survey reports that "the percentage of children under age five years who are underweight is almost 20 times as high in India as would be expected in a healthy, well-nourished population and is almost twice as high as the average percentage of underweight children in sub-Saharan African countries.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• A huge programme called the Integrated Child Development Services was set up in 1975, but an evaluation done in 2011 for the Planning Commission found that 60% of the annual budget for supplementary nutrition was being diverted. (A study done for the NHRC confirms this.)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The Indira Awas Yojana, set up to provide rural housing, requires that an applicant have a plot of land. Millions of landless are excluded. The scheme does not give enough to build a house, and there is some evidence that those who take the money end up in debt. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC, which monitors human rights in 28 representative districts across India, finds in its field visits that none of the flagship programmes function well.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>The Naxal movement</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Estimates are that 200 out of the 600 districts in India are affected, though the Government puts the figure at around 60 districts.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Torture in India (2010)[/inside], which has been prepared by the Asian Centre for Human Rights, </span><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2010.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2010.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Since 2000, according to the statistics submitted to the parliament by the Ministry of Home Affairs, prison custody deaths have increased by 54.02% by 2008, while police custody deaths during the same period have increased by 19.88%. In fact, under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) rule from 2004-2005 to 2007-2008, prison custody deaths have increased by 70.72% while police custody deaths during the same period have increased by 12.60%.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• On 8 April 2010, the Cabinet approved the decision to introduce the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 before the parliament and ratify the UN Convention Against Torture. The Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 is being treated as a secret document. Its earlier draft, Prevention of Torture Bill, 2008, contained only three operative paragraphs relating to (1) definition of torture, (2) punishment for torture, and (3) limitations for cognizance of offences. The Prevention of Torture Bill, 2008 was highly flawed and ACHR had submitted specific recommendations to the Government of India after holding a National Conference in New Delhi in June 2009.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In the decade 1999-2009, the Congress-National Congress Party ruled Maharashtra had the highest number of deaths (246 cases) in police custody followed by Uttar Pradesh (165 cases), Gujarat (139 cases), West Bengal (112 cases), Andhra Pradesh (99 cases), Tamil Nadu (93 cases), Assam (91 cases), Punjab (71 cases), Karnataka (69 cases), Madhya Pradesh (66 cases), Haryana (45 cases), Bihar (43 cases), Delhi (42 cases), Kerala (41 cases), Rajasthan (38 cases), Jharkhand (31 cases), Orissa (27 cases), Chhattisgarh (23 cases), Meghalaya (17 cases), Uttarakhand (16 cases), Arunachal Pradesh (15 cases), Tripura (9 cases), Goa (5 cases), Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Chandigarh (4 cases each), Pondicherry (3 cases) and Mizoram, Sikkim, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, and Andaman & Nicober Islands (1 each).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Of the 127 police cusody deaths registered by the NHRC in 2008-2009, the highest number of cases were reported from Uttar Pradesh (24 cases) followed by Maharashtra (23), Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat (12 cases each), Assam (7 cases), Tamil Nadu and Haryana (6 cases each), Bihar and Madhya Pradesh (5 cases each), Punjab, Rajasthan & West Bengal (4 cases each), Jharkhand, Karnataka, Arunachal Pradesh, Orissa and Kerala (2 cases each), and 1 case reported from Meghalaya, Tripura, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh and Dadar & Nagar Haveli.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The police routinely cite “suicide” as a cause of death in custody. According to the NCRB, 31 persons died by committing suicide in police custody in 2007, 24 persons in 2006 and 30 persons in 2005.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), one custodial rape case was reported in India in 2007, two custodial rape cases were reported in 2006, and seven custodial rape cases in 2005.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Among all the armed opposition groups in India, the Naxalites or Maoists are probably the worst human rights violators. In blatant disregard for the international humanitarian law, the Maoists continued to kill civilians on the allegation of being “police informers”, members of the anti-Maoist civilian militia such as “Salwa Judum” and for not obeying their diktats. The Maoists have been responsible for brutal killing of their hostages after abduction. Often the hostages are killed by slitting their throats or beheading. Often these killings were authorized by Maoist ‘people’s courts or Jan Adalats.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The National Human Rights Commission registered 1,996 cases of torture of prisoners in 2006-2007, 2,481 cases in 2007-2008 and 1,596 cases in 2008-2009 (upto 11 December 2008).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) under Ministry of Home Affairs, 1,424 prisoners died in 2006, 1,387 prisoners in 2005, 1,169 prisoners in 2004, and 1,060 prisoners in 2003 in India. Of the 1,423 prisoners who died in 2006, 80 died as a result of “unnatural” causes.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The 2007 Annual Report of the National Crime Records Bureau reported a total of 30,031 cases - including 206 cases under the Protection of Civil Rights Act and 9,819 cases under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989 – against the Scheduled Castes in 2007. Although the average charge-sheeting rate for the crimes against the SCs was 90.6 per cent, the average conviction rate was only 30.9%. A total of 51,705 persons (78.9%) out of 65,554 persons arrested for crimes committed against Scheduled Castes were charge-sheeted but only 29.4% were convicted consisting of 13,871 persons out of 47,136 persons against whom trials were completed. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The NHRC on a number of occasions has failed to recognize torture despite medical evidence supporting allegations of torture. While considering the cases, the NHRC overly relies on official records (often reports of the security establishment) that it often ignores contrary evidence including medical records.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]Prison Statistics 2006[/inside], National Crime Records Bureau<br /> (</span><a href="http://ncrb.nic.in/PSI2006/prison2006.htm"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://ncrb.nic.in/PSI2006/prison2006.htm</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">): </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> A total of 1,423 prisoners died in jails due to natural and unnatural causes during 2006 in the country out of which 1,343 were natural deaths and 80 were due to unnatural causes</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Deaths due to murder by inmates were reported only from Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh and Karnataka (1 each).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Uttar Pradesh (3,101) has reported the highest number of inmates detained for a period of 2 to 3 years followed by Bihar (2,565). Meghalaya has reported the highest percentage (9.6%) undertrial prisoners kept in custody for 2 to 3 years followed by Nagaland (7.7%), Jharkhand (7.2%) and Uttaranchal (7.1%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Uttar Pradesh has reported the highest (8,886) number of undertrial prisoners detained for a period of 6 months to 1 year followed by Bihar (8,076).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 1,569 undertrials were reported languishing in jails for 5 years or more in different parts of the country.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The percentage of undertrial prisoners to the total prisoners in jails is 65.7 percent in the country and the share of convicted prisoners is 31.3 percent</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The highest percentage (28.0%) of undertrials were charged with Murder. Uttar Pradesh reported the highest number of (9,936) such Undertrials (18.5%) followed by Bihar 8,102 (15.1%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 1,569 Undertrials (0.6% of total undertrials) were detained in jails for more than 5 years at the end of the year 2006. Punjab had the highest number of such undertrials (377) followed by Bihar (356).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 347 Convicts including 8 females lodged in different jails of the country at the end of 2006 were awarded capital punishment.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 62,180 Convicts accounting for 53.3% of total Convicts in the country were undergoing sentences for Life Imprisonment at the end of the year 2006.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 13,084 Convicts were repeat/recidivists, which accounted for 5.1% of total convicts admitted during the year.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 64 convicted prisoners were in the age group of 16-18 years, 44,371 in the age group of 18 to 30 years, 56,479 convicts were in the age group of 30 to 50 years and 15,761 convicts were 50 years or more.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 567 undertrial prisoners were in the age group of 16-18 years, 1,06,335 in the age group of above 18 to 30 years, 1,09,039 undertrials were in the age group of above 30 to 50 years and 29,303 undertrials were 50 years or more.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>According to the Annual Report 2004-05, National Human Rights Commission,<br /> (</em></span><a href="http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/AR/AR04-05ENG.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/AR/AR04-05ENG.pdf</em></span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>): </em></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><strong>Custodial deaths</strong></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In keeping with the guidelines issued by the Commission, the State Government Authorities have been reporting all deaths in custody, police as well as judicial, natural or otherwise, to the Commission. In the year 2004-2005, out of 1493 custodial deaths reported to the Commission, 136 deaths in police custody and 1,357 deaths in judicial custody. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> There was, however, an increase in the deaths in police custody in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Orissa, Delhi, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In the light of the revised guidelines issued by the Commission on 2 December, 2003, 122 intimations were received from the various State Governments about killings in encounters during the year 2004-2005. These included 66 such intimations from the State of Uttar Pradesh, 18 intimations from Andhra Pradesh, 9 from Delhi and 5 each from Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Separately, the Commission also received 84 complaints about alleged killings in fake encounters.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><strong>Population of prisoners</strong></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The total prison population was 3,36,151, which indicated an overcrowding of 41.47% against the authorised capacity of 2,37,617. 11 States/ UTs, namely, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Sikkim, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, and Delhi experienced overcrowding ranging from 52% to 224%. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Delhi continues to hold the most overcrowded jails (224%) followed by Jharkhand (195%) Chhattisgarh (111%) and Gujarat (104%). Jails had idle capacities in 6 States and 4 Union Territories, namely Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur, Nagaland, Rajasthan, Uttaranchal, West Bengal, Chandigarh, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Lakshdeep</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Undertrial prisoners constituted 71.14% of the total prison population in the country. 11 States/UTs have undertrial prisoners exceeding 80% of the total prison population. These are: Dadra & Nagar Haveli (100%), Meghalaya (94.71%), Manipur (92.51%), Jammu & Kashmir (88.90%), Bihar (85.66%), Daman & Diu (84.15%), Nagaland (83.31%), Uttar Pradesh (82.47%), Delhi (81.45%), Chandigarh (80.42%) and West Bengal (80.20%). Chhattisgarh is the only State, which has less than 50% undertrial prisoners (48.57%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Women constituted 3.97% of the total prison population in the country. Uttaranchal (11.69%) tops the list followed by Mizoram (10.45%), Tamil Nadu (9.25%), Chandigarh (6.47%), Andhra Pradesh (5.77%), West Bengal (5.71%) and Punjab (5.68%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> A total of 1544 children were in jails with their mothers. U.P. with 385 accounted for the largest, followed by West Bengal (163), Maharashtra (143), Jharkhand (142) and Madhya Pradesh (127).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><strong>Human rights abuse</strong></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The total number of cases registered in the Commission during 2004-2005 was 74,401, while the corresponding figure for the year 2003-2004 was 72,990. Of the cases that were registered during the year under review, 72,775 cases were complaints of alleged human rights violations besides 1500 cases related to intimations of custodial deaths, 4 cases of custodial rapes and 122 related to police encounters.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Of the custodial deaths that were reported in the course of the year 2004-2005, 7 deaths allegedly occurred in the custody of defence / para-military forces, 136 deaths occurred in police custody, while 1357 in judicial custody.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> As in the past, the largest number of complaints registered was from the State of Uttar Pradesh; they numbered 44,351 or 59.6 percent of the total number of complaints registered by the Commission. Delhi followed Uttar Pradesh, with 5,221 complaints while Bihar coming third with 3,917 complaints.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Torture in India 2008-A State of Denial[/inside], which has been brought out by the Asian Centre for Human Rights (</span><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2008.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2008.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">): </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> There exist serious weaknesses in institutions that should check torture in India. The Courts have proven a powerful tool against torture but are hampered by lack of specific legislation, immunities offered under the Criminal Procedure Code and national security laws as well as the more general problem of judicial delay.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2006-2007, the NHRC received a total of 1,597 custodial death cases including 118 cases in police custody, 1,477 cases in judicial custody and two cases in the custody of defense and paramilitary forces.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2005-2006, the NHRC received 1,575 custodial deaths including 124 in police custody and 1,451 in judicial custody. In 2004-2005, NHRC received 1,493 cases of custodial deaths including 136 deaths in police custody and 1, 357 deaths in judicial custody. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2003-2004, there were 1,340 custodial death cases including 183 in police custody and 1,157 in judicial custody. In 2002-2003, NHRC received 1,463 custodial death cases including 162 deaths in police custody and 1,300 deaths in judicial custody, one death in the custody of para-military forces. The statistics of NHRC imply that in the last five years 7,468 persons at an average of 1,494 persons per year or four person in a day died in police and prison custody in India. However, these figures represent only a fraction of the actual cases of torture. Cases of torture not resulting in death are not recorded. They do not differentiate between deaths in custody resulting from legitimate causes, for example old age, and due to the use of torture. Moreover, the NHRC has no mandate to investigate or record human rights violations perpetrated by military and para-military forces. NHRC often reports that there were no custodial deaths resulting from torture in the conflict-afflicted state of Manipur or in Jammu and Kashmir. This assertion lies uneasily with the high levels of well-documented cases in those states.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> A large number of reported cases of torture and custodial death result from attempts to extract a confession relating to theft or other petty offences. Clearly this suggests that the suspects belonging to the lower economic and social strata are particularly vulnerable.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to [inside]India Human Rights Report, 2008[/inside], which has been brought out by the Asian Centre for Human Rights (</span><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/AR08/AR2008.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/AR08/AR2008.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">):</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2007, 29,596 cases on alienation and restoration of tribal lands were heard by the courts in Madhya Pradesh. Not a single case was ruled in favour of the tribal groups.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> “Encounter killing” is yet another euphemism used to hide extrajudicial executions. It presupposes an armed encounter. The fact that out of 301 complaints of “encounter deaths” between 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2007, over 66% (201 cases) were received by NHRC from Uttar Pradesh alone – which has no armed conflict - is extremely disturbing.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2007 the NCRB reported that 139 people died in police custody. 23 people died during production, process of the courts and the journey connected with investigation; 38 of them died during their hospitalization and treatment; 9 died in mob attacks/riots; 2 were killed by other criminals; 31 committed suicide; 7 escaped and 29 died from illness/ natural causes.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => 'Rural Expert', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 13, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'human-rights-56', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 1, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 56, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $imgtag = false $imgURL = '#' $titleText = 'Human Rights' $descText = 'KEY TRENDS • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2016 was 92 and 351, respectively. The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2016 was 35 and 759, respectively #$ • In 2015, the NCRB recorded over 73 lakh complaints of cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to investigate, such...' $foundposition = false $startp = (int) 0 $endp = (int) 200preg_replace - [internal], line ?? include - APP/Template/SearchResult/index.ctp, line 34 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 880 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Warning (2): preg_replace() [<a href='https://secure.php.net/function.preg-replace'>function.preg-replace</a>]: Unknown modifier '2' [APP/Template/SearchResult/index.ctp, line 35]Code Context$titleText = preg_replace('/(' . $qryStr . ')/is', "<font style='background-color:yellow;'>" . $qryStr . "</font>", strip_tags($titleText));$descText = preg_replace('/(' . $qryStr . ')/is', "<font style='background-color:yellow;'>" . $qryStr . "</font>", strip_tags($descText));?>$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/SearchResult/index.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'articleList' => object(Cake\ORM\ResultSet) { 'items' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'qryStr' => 'Human Development Report 2021/22', 'mostViewSectionData' => [], 'topTwentyTags' => [ (int) 0 => 'Agriculture', (int) 1 => 'Food Security', (int) 2 => 'Law and Justice', (int) 3 => 'Health', (int) 4 => 'Right to Food', (int) 5 => 'Corruption', (int) 6 => 'farming', (int) 7 => 'Environment', (int) 8 => 'Right to Information', (int) 9 => 'NREGS', (int) 10 => 'Human Rights', (int) 11 => 'Governance', (int) 12 => 'PDS', (int) 13 => 'COVID-19', (int) 14 => 'Land Acquisition', (int) 15 => 'mgnrega', (int) 16 => 'Farmers', (int) 17 => 'transparency', (int) 18 => 'Gender', (int) 19 => 'Poverty' ], 'bottomNewsAlertArticlesData' => [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 65259, 'name' => ' Moving Upstream: Luni – Fellowship', 'seo_url' => 'moving-upstream-luni-fellowship', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 65169, 'name' => ' 135 Million Indians Exited “Multidimensional" Poverty as per Government...', 'seo_url' => '135-million-indians-exited-multidimensional-poverty-as-per-government-figures-is-that-the-same-as-poverty-reduction', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 65120, 'name' => ' Explainer: Why are Tomato Prices on Fire?', 'seo_url' => 'explainer-why-are-tomato-prices-on-fire', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 64981, 'name' => ' NSSO Survey: Only 39.1% of all Households have Drinking...', 'seo_url' => 'nsso-survey-only-39-1-of-all-households-have-drinking-water-within-dwelling-46-7-of-rural-households-use-firewood-for-cooking', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ] ], 'videosData' => [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 393, 'name' => ' Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...', 'seo_url' => 'Short-Video-on-im4change-Hindi-website-Inclusive-Media-for-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/I51LYnP8BOk/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 392, 'name' => ' "Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-1- Scope-of-IDEA-and-AgriStack-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/kNqha-SwfIY/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 390, 'name' => ' "Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-2-Farmer-Centric-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/6kIVjlgZItk/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 389, 'name' => ' "Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-3-Future-of-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/2BeHTu0y7xc/1.jpg' ] ], 'videos_archivesData' => [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 388, 'name' => ' Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for...', 'title' => 'Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for Agrarian Studies)', 'seo_url' => 'Public-Spending-on-Agriculture-in-India-Source-Foundation-for-Agrarian-Studies', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/s6ScX4zFRyU/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 387, 'name' => ' Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws...', 'title' => 'Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws in India' by Prof. Vikas Rawal, JNU (Source: Journal Of Agrarian Change) ', 'seo_url' => 'Agrarian-Change-Seminar-Protests-against-the-New-Farm-Laws-in-India-by-Prof-Vikas-Rawal-JNU-Source-Journal-Of-Agrarian-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/SwSmSv0CStE/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 386, 'name' => ' Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis...', 'title' => 'Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis (Source: Azim Premji University)', 'seo_url' => 'Webinar-Ramrao-The-Story-of-India-Farm-Crisis-Source-Azim-Premji-University', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/sSxUZnSDXgY/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 385, 'name' => ' Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship...', 'title' => 'Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship (Source: IGIDR)', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-agricultural-transformation-in-India', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/BcaVuNYK_e8/1.jpg' ] ], 'urlPrefix' => '', 'rightLinl_success' => 'Success Stories', 'rightLinl_interview' => 'Interviews', 'rightLinl_interview_link' => 'interviews', 'readMoreAlerts' => 'Read More', 'moreNewAlerts' => 'More News Alerts...', 'moreNewsClippings' => 'More...', 'lang' => 'EN', 'dataReportArticleMenu' => [ (int) 8 => [ (int) 1 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 6 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 33 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 7 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 35 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 2 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 9 => [ (int) 36 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 30 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 29 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 28 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 3192 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 11 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 3193 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 27 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 18 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 10 => [ (int) 20357 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 13 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 21 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 20 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 12 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 15 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 14 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 57 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 23 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 12 => [ (int) 22 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 25 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 24 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], (int) 13 => [ (int) 20358 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 17 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 26 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 8 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 16 => [ [maximum depth reached] ], (int) 19 => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ] ], 'dataReportCat' => [ (int) 8 => 'Farm Crisis', (int) 9 => 'Empowerment', (int) 10 => 'Hunger / HDI', (int) 12 => 'Environment', (int) 13 => 'Law & Justice' ], 'curPageURL' => 'https://im4change.in/search?page=12&qryStr=Human+Development+Report+2021%2F22', 'youtube_video_id' => 'MmaTlntk-wc', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $articleList = object(Cake\ORM\ResultSet) { 'items' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 1 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 2 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 3 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {}, (int) 4 => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {} ] } $qryStr = 'Human Development Report 2021/22' $mostViewSectionData = [] $topTwentyTags = [ (int) 0 => 'Agriculture', (int) 1 => 'Food Security', (int) 2 => 'Law and Justice', (int) 3 => 'Health', (int) 4 => 'Right to Food', (int) 5 => 'Corruption', (int) 6 => 'farming', (int) 7 => 'Environment', (int) 8 => 'Right to Information', (int) 9 => 'NREGS', (int) 10 => 'Human Rights', (int) 11 => 'Governance', (int) 12 => 'PDS', (int) 13 => 'COVID-19', (int) 14 => 'Land Acquisition', (int) 15 => 'mgnrega', (int) 16 => 'Farmers', (int) 17 => 'transparency', (int) 18 => 'Gender', (int) 19 => 'Poverty' ] $bottomNewsAlertArticlesData = [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 65259, 'name' => ' Moving Upstream: Luni – Fellowship', 'seo_url' => 'moving-upstream-luni-fellowship', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 65169, 'name' => ' 135 Million Indians Exited “Multidimensional" Poverty as per Government...', 'seo_url' => '135-million-indians-exited-multidimensional-poverty-as-per-government-figures-is-that-the-same-as-poverty-reduction', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 65120, 'name' => ' Explainer: Why are Tomato Prices on Fire?', 'seo_url' => 'explainer-why-are-tomato-prices-on-fire', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 64981, 'name' => ' NSSO Survey: Only 39.1% of all Households have Drinking...', 'seo_url' => 'nsso-survey-only-39-1-of-all-households-have-drinking-water-within-dwelling-46-7-of-rural-households-use-firewood-for-cooking', 'cat_slug' => 'news-alerts-57' ] ] $videosData = [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 393, 'name' => ' Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...', 'seo_url' => 'Short-Video-on-im4change-Hindi-website-Inclusive-Media-for-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/I51LYnP8BOk/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 392, 'name' => ' "Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-1- Scope-of-IDEA-and-AgriStack-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/kNqha-SwfIY/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 390, 'name' => ' "Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-2-Farmer-Centric-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/6kIVjlgZItk/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 389, 'name' => ' "Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...', 'seo_url' => 'Session-3-Future-of-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-in-Exploring-Digitalisation-in-Agriculture-29-April-2022', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/2BeHTu0y7xc/1.jpg' ] ] $videos_archivesData = [ (int) 0 => [ 'id' => (int) 388, 'name' => ' Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for...', 'title' => 'Public Spending on Agriculture in India (Source: Foundation for Agrarian Studies)', 'seo_url' => 'Public-Spending-on-Agriculture-in-India-Source-Foundation-for-Agrarian-Studies', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/s6ScX4zFRyU/1.jpg' ], (int) 1 => [ 'id' => (int) 387, 'name' => ' Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws...', 'title' => 'Agrarian Change Seminar: 'Protests against the New Farm Laws in India' by Prof. Vikas Rawal, JNU (Source: Journal Of Agrarian Change) ', 'seo_url' => 'Agrarian-Change-Seminar-Protests-against-the-New-Farm-Laws-in-India-by-Prof-Vikas-Rawal-JNU-Source-Journal-Of-Agrarian-Change', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/SwSmSv0CStE/1.jpg' ], (int) 2 => [ 'id' => (int) 386, 'name' => ' Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis...', 'title' => 'Webinar: Ramrao - The Story of India's Farm Crisis (Source: Azim Premji University)', 'seo_url' => 'Webinar-Ramrao-The-Story-of-India-Farm-Crisis-Source-Azim-Premji-University', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/sSxUZnSDXgY/1.jpg' ], (int) 3 => [ 'id' => (int) 385, 'name' => ' Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship...', 'title' => 'Water and Agricultural Transformation in India: A Symbiotic Relationship (Source: IGIDR)', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-agricultural-transformation-in-India', 'video_img' => 'https://img.youtube.com/vi/BcaVuNYK_e8/1.jpg' ] ] $urlPrefix = '' $rightLinl_success = 'Success Stories' $rightLinl_interview = 'Interviews' $rightLinl_interview_link = 'interviews' $readMoreAlerts = 'Read More' $moreNewAlerts = 'More News Alerts...' $moreNewsClippings = 'More...' $lang = 'EN' $dataReportArticleMenu = [ (int) 8 => [ (int) 1 => [ 'title' => 'Farm Suicides', 'days' => (float) 728, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-27 01:16:01', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672099200, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/farmers039-suicides-14.html' ], (int) 6 => [ 'title' => 'Unemployment', 'days' => (float) 735, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-20 05:36:30', 'modifydate' => (int) 1671494400, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/unemployment-30.html' ], (int) 33 => [ 'title' => 'Rural distress', 'days' => (float) 767, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-11-18 01:08:04', 'modifydate' => (int) 1668729600, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/rural-distress-70.html' ], (int) 7 => [ 'title' => 'Migration', 'days' => (float) 767, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-11-18 01:07:46', 'modifydate' => (int) 1668729600, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/migration-34.html' ], (int) 35 => [ 'title' => 'Key Facts', 'days' => (float) 1252, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-07-21 12:30:36', 'modifydate' => (int) 1626825600, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/key-facts-72.html' ], (int) 2 => [ 'title' => 'Debt Trap', 'days' => (float) 2375, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2018-06-24 08:27:27', 'modifydate' => (int) 1529798400, 'seo_url' => 'farm-crisis/debt-trap-15.html' ] ], (int) 9 => [ (int) 36 => [ 'title' => 'Union Budget And Other Economic Policies', 'days' => (float) 621, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-04-13 05:00:51', 'modifydate' => (int) 1681344000, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/union-budget-73.html' ], (int) 30 => [ 'title' => 'Forest and Tribal Rights', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:57:02', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/forest-and-tribal-rights-61.html' ], (int) 29 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Education', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:56:34', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-education-60.html' ], (int) 28 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Food', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:55:28', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-food-59.html' ], (int) 3192 => [ 'title' => 'Displacement', 'days' => (float) 684, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-02-09 08:54:47', 'modifydate' => (int) 1675900800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/displacement-3279.html' ], (int) 11 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Work (MG-NREGA)', 'days' => (float) 721, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-01-03 02:48:52', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672704000, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-work-mg-nrega-39.html' ], (int) 3193 => [ 'title' => 'GENDER', 'days' => (float) 735, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-20 05:37:26', 'modifydate' => (int) 1671494400, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/gender-3280.html' ], (int) 27 => [ 'title' => 'Right to Information', 'days' => (float) 804, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-10-12 01:58:29', 'modifydate' => (int) 1665532800, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/right-to-information-58.html' ], (int) 18 => [ 'title' => 'Social Audit', 'days' => (float) 1510, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2020-11-05 09:19:21', 'modifydate' => (int) 1604534400, 'seo_url' => 'empowerment/social-audit-48.html' ] ], (int) 10 => [ (int) 20357 => [ 'title' => 'Poverty and inequality', 'days' => (float) 586, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-05-18 10:06:37', 'modifydate' => (int) 1684368000, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/poverty-and-inequality-20499.html' ], (int) 13 => [ 'title' => 'Malnutrition', 'days' => (float) 721, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-01-03 02:49:33', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672704000, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/malnutrition-41.html' ], (int) 21 => [ 'title' => 'Public Health', 'days' => (float) 721, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-01-03 02:49:11', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672704000, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/public-health-51.html' ], (int) 20 => [ 'title' => 'Education', 'days' => (float) 728, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-27 01:19:42', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672099200, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/education-50.html' ], (int) 12 => [ 'title' => 'Hunger Overview', 'days' => (float) 735, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-20 05:39:23', 'modifydate' => (int) 1671494400, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/hunger-overview-40.html' ], (int) 15 => [ 'title' => 'HDI Overview', 'days' => (float) 750, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-05 01:24:58', 'modifydate' => (int) 1670198400, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/hdi-overview-45.html' ], (int) 14 => [ 'title' => 'PDS/ Ration/ Food Security', 'days' => (float) 797, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-10-19 03:14:42', 'modifydate' => (int) 1666137600, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/pds-ration-food-security-42.html' ], (int) 57 => [ 'title' => 'SDGs', 'days' => (float) 847, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-08-30 02:45:06', 'modifydate' => (int) 1661817600, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/sdgs-113.html' ], (int) 23 => [ 'title' => 'Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS)', 'days' => (float) 1223, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-08-19 12:40:33', 'modifydate' => (int) 1629331200, 'seo_url' => 'hunger-hdi/mid-day-meal-scheme-mdms-53.html' ] ], (int) 12 => [ (int) 22 => [ 'title' => 'Time Bomb Ticking', 'days' => (float) 727, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-12-28 02:29:19', 'modifydate' => (int) 1672185600, 'seo_url' => 'environment/time-bomb-ticking-52.html' ], (int) 25 => [ 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'days' => (float) 861, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-08-16 03:24:37', 'modifydate' => (int) 1660608000, 'seo_url' => 'environment/water-and-sanitation-55.html' ], (int) 24 => [ 'title' => 'Impact on Agriculture', 'days' => (float) 1567, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2020-09-09 09:23:52', 'modifydate' => (int) 1599609600, 'seo_url' => 'environment/impact-on-agriculture-54.html' ] ], (int) 13 => [ (int) 20358 => [ 'title' => 'Social Justice', 'days' => (float) 249, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2024-04-19 12:29:31', 'modifydate' => (int) 1713484800, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/social-justice-20500.html' ], (int) 17 => [ 'title' => 'Access to Justice', 'days' => (float) 580, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2023-05-24 09:31:16', 'modifydate' => (int) 1684886400, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/access-to-justice-47.html' ], (int) 26 => [ 'title' => 'Human Rights', 'days' => (float) 943, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-05-26 01:30:51', 'modifydate' => (int) 1653523200, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/human-rights-56.html' ], (int) 8 => [ 'title' => 'Corruption', 'days' => (float) 987, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2022-04-12 03:14:21', 'modifydate' => (int) 1649721600, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/corruption-35.html' ], (int) 16 => [ 'title' => 'General Insecurity', 'days' => (float) 1409, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-02-14 04:34:06', 'modifydate' => (int) 1613260800, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/general-insecurity-46.html' ], (int) 19 => [ 'title' => 'Disaster & Relief', 'days' => (float) 1409, 'currentdate' => (int) 1734954949, 'modified' => '2021-02-14 04:23:38', 'modifydate' => (int) 1613260800, 'seo_url' => 'law-justice/disaster-relief-49.html' ] ] ] $dataReportCat = [ (int) 8 => 'Farm Crisis', (int) 9 => 'Empowerment', (int) 10 => 'Hunger / HDI', (int) 12 => 'Environment', (int) 13 => 'Law & Justice' ] $curPageURL = 'https://im4change.in/search?page=12&qryStr=Human+Development+Report+2021%2F22' $youtube_video_id = 'MmaTlntk-wc' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin' $rn = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 26, 'title' => 'Human Rights', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS </span></p> <div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2016 was 92 and 351, respectively. The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2016 was 35 and 759, respectively <strong>#$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• In 2015, the NCRB recorded over 73 lakh complaints of cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to investigate, such as murder and rape. Between 2005 and 2015, crime rate (i.e., crime per lakh population) for cognizable crimes has increased by 28% from 456 complaints per lakh persons to 582 per lakh persons. This has been primarily because of increase in crime rates of alcohol-prohibition crime, theft, kidnapping and abduction, crimes against women and cheating <strong>"</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• At the national-level, the total number of deaths in police custody was 97 in 2015 <strong>$$</strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of police personnel charge-sheeted for human rights violation was 34 in 2015. No police personnel was convicted for human rights violation in 2015<strong> $$</strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2015 were 42 and 39, respectively. The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2015 were 7 and 298, respectively <strong>$$</strong><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 53.9 in 2015, which was 56.3 in 2014<strong> $$</strong><br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been the highest in Delhi UT (23.7), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (13.5) and Chhattisgarh (12.2)<strong> $$</strong><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has increased from 20.1 in 2014 to 21.1 in 2015 <strong>$$ </strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• India has detected trafficking victims from other countries in the subregion, particularly Nepal and Bangladesh. Victims trafficked from other areas– for example Eastern Europe - have also been detected in India, but only sporadically. Victims from a variety of countries in South-East Asia and the Indian sub-continent are trafficked mainly to the Gulf and other Middle Eastern countries<strong>**</strong><br /> <br /> • Globally, there has been a rise in the share of girl children in the total number of detected trafficking victims from 10% in 2004 to 21% in 2011. Similarly, the share of boy children in the total number of detected victims increased from 3% in 2004 to 12% in 2011. However, the share of adult women in the total number of detected victims fell from 74% in 2004 to 49% in 2011<strong>**</strong> </div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• In 2014 the percentage of elders abused went up drastically from 23% in the previous year to 50%. Women seemed to be more vulnerable with 52% women facing abuse as against 48% men<strong>*</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of crimes committed against women increased from 2,28,650 in 2011 to 2,44,270 in 2012. An increase of 1.1% in human trafficking incidence was observed (3,554 cases in 2012 as compared to 3,517 in 2011) <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of crimes committed against children increased from 33,098 in 2011 to 38,172 in 2012 <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The total number of crimes committed against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) in 2012 stood at 33,655 and 5,922, respectively <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• 205 cases of Human Rights Violation by Police were reported during 2012 out of which 19 were charge-sheeted <strong>$</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• From 2001 to 2010, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) recorded 14,231 deaths in police and judicial custody in India. This includes 1,504 deaths in police custody and 12,727 deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010<strong>#</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• In the last three years, 2,044 cases of police torture were registered to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). These included 574 cases in 2008-2009, 615 cases in 2009-2010 and 855 cases in 2010-2011<strong>#</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC registered only a total of the 25 cases of death in the custody of the military/ para-military forces from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010 up to 28 February 2010<strong>#</strong></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">#$ Crime in India 2016 Statistics (released in 2017), National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://www.ncrb.nic.in">www.ncrb.nic.in</a></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">" Police Reforms in India (June 2017), authored by Anviti Chaturvedi, PRS Legislative Research, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Police%20reforms%20in%20India.pdf">click here</a> to access </div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">$$ Crime in India 2015, National Crime Records Bureau (released in 2016), <a href="http://www.ncrb.nic.in">www.ncrb.nic.in</a></div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">** Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2014, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), (please <a href="http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/glotip/GLOTIP_2014_full_report.pdf">click here</a> to access the report)</div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">* Elder Abuse in India (2014) by HelpAge India, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Elder%20Abuse%20in%20India%202014.pdf" title="Elder Abuse India 2014">click here</a> to download) </div> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> </div> <div style="text-align:justify">$ Crime in India 2012, National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a> </div> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"># Torture in India 2011, Asian Centre for Human Rights,</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf</a> </p> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="/upload/files/ANNI%20Report%202020%20on%20the%20Performance%20of%20National%20Human%20Rights%20Institutions%20released%20in%20December%202021.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]2020 ANNI Report on the Performance of National Human Rights Institutions (released in December 2021)[/inside], which was prepared by FORUM-ASIA and funded by Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Kindly <a href="/upload/files/ANNI-Summary_Pages_v2.pdf">click here</a> to access the Executive Summary of the 2020 ANNI [Asian NGO Network on National Human Rights Institutions] Report on the Performance of National Human Rights Institutions.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">---</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> The <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> titled '<a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">Extinguishing Law and Life</a>: <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">Police Killings and Cover-Up</a> <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">in the state of Uttar Pradesh</a>' examines the death of 18 young men in these 17 instances of alleged extrajudicial killings by UP police, which were investigated by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Spread across six districts in western Uttar Pradesh-UP, these killings took place between March 2017 and March 2018. The <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> evaluates the investigations and inquiries conducted in these 17 cases and examines the role of the investigating agency, Executive Magistrates, Judicial Magistrates, and the NHRC, to assess whether they complied with the existing legal framework. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">The <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> reveals gross violations of law, both procedural and substantive, by the investigating agency and the judicial magistrates, in investigating these killings. Independent bodies such as the NHRC and oversight mechanisms such as magisterial inquiries have failed to identify these violations of law and have ignored factual contradictions in the police version of events. Instead, they have routinely condoned the unconstitutional procedures followed by the police during these investigations. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> titled [inside]Extinguishing Law and Life: Police Killings and Cover-Up in the state of Uttar Pradesh (released in October 2021)[/inside], which has been prepared by Youth for Human Rights Documentation (YHRD), Citizens Against Hate (CAH) and People’s Watch, are as follows:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">1. Of the 17 cases analysed, in not one case has an FIR been registered against the police team that was involved in the killing. Instead, in all 17 cases, FIRs have been registered against the deceased victims on charges of attempted murder under section 307 IPC and other offenses.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">2. The FIRs registered against the deceased victims in each of the 17 cases claim an identical sequence of events leading to the killing – details of a spontaneous shoot­out between police officers and alleged criminals in which the police are fired upon, and then (in self­-defence) fire back, leading to the death of one of the alleged criminals, while his accomplice always manages to escape ­ raising doubts about the veracity of these claims.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">3. In violation of the guidelines of the NHRC and the Supreme Court in PUCL, in a majority of the cases, the initial investigation was conducted by a police officer from the same police station as the police team involved in the killing, often of the same rank as the senior-most person in the "encounter" team. In all these cases, the investigation was later transferred to another Police Station, almost as if to show compliance with PUCL guidelines.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">4. In all the cases studied in the <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a>, the investigations conducted by the ‘independent’ investigating team of a different police station were inadequate. These investigations accept the police version that they killed the victims in "self­-defence", even though the justification of self­-defence for murder has to be proved and determined through a judicial trial. The Police's defense cannot be presumed from the police version or confirmed through an investigation. No investigation was conducted on whether the use of force was necessary and proportionate. Factual inconsistencies and contradictions were also overlooked. These include –</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>a. Post­-mortem Reports show lethal force used: The bodies of 12 of the victims show multiple gunshot wounds on the torso, abdomen, and even on the head; some dead bodies also show fractures. Post-mortem Reports of five deceased victims show blackening and tattooing around the bullet entry wounds, indicating firing from close range. This contradicts the police claim that minimal force was used or that the bullets were aimed at the lower part of the victims’ bodies to immobilize them and ensure their arrest.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>b. Police only sustained minor injuries:­ Out of the approximate 280 police personnel involved in these 17 police killings, only around 20 police officers sustained injuries. In 15 out of the 17 cases analysed, the police sustained only minor injuries.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>c. Inadequate proof that the deceased or his accomplice were holding weapons or fired at the Police:­ In seven cases, the fingerprints of the deceased were not found on the weapons recovered from the scene of the crime. Therefore, the police’s claim that the victims used weapons to shoot at them is contradicted by the independent record.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>d. No evidence to suggest that retaliatory firing by police was necessary: There is an effort to present bulletproof jackets with bullets in them as proof that retaliatory firing was required. At least 16 bullet-proof jackets contain bullet entries. However, there is nothing to connect these bullets to the weapons that are claimed to have been recovered from the deceased. It has not even been conclusively shown that these bulletproof jackets were actually used in the purported “encounter”. In some cases, there is nothing to connect the bullet injuries sustained by the police to the weapons purportedly handled by the deceased.</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">5. In 16 out of the 17 cases analysed, the investigating officer closed the investigation by filing Closure Reports in court before the Judicial Magistrates. Overlooking the factual contradictions that emerge from the evidence, the closure report in all the 16 cases confirms the police version that the firing was in self­-defence. All the cases were closed on the ground that the victims – who were named as an “accused” ­ were dead and that the police could not find any information about the accomplice who escaped the crime scene. This process has been held to be unconstitutional by the High Courts and the NHRC in other instances.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">6. In 11 out of 16 cases where a Closure Report was filed by the police, there appears to be an abdication of judicial powers by the Magistrate who has unquestioningly accepted the Closure of the investigation. By naming the deceased as "accused" in these cases, the requirement of the Court to issue notice to the victim's family before closing the case was done away with. Instead, Magistrates issued notice to the police officer, the complainant in the FIR, who in turn gives a “no objection” letter to close the investigation. Through this process, the Judicial Magistrates accept the closure of the investigation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">7. The law (Section 176(1­A) of the CrPC) requires an inquiry into the cause of death to be conducted by a Judicial Magistrate, however, in at least eight cases, the inquiries were conducted by an Executive Magistrate in violation of CrPC provisions. This violation also indicates that a lack of clarity in the PUCL guidelines is being taken advantage of to evade accountability. The Executive Magistrates held the police killings to be "genuine", acting well beyond their powers and jurisdiction, which is only to determine the cause of death and not determine whether an offense has been committed. The Executive Magistrates’ findings and reports are based on the police version, and most reports do not even consider forensic or ballistic evidence. The statements of family members have either not been recorded or recorded in a perfunctory manner.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">8. Three years after the NHRC directed an investigation into 17 cases detailed in this <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a>, 14 cases have been decided, two cases are still pending and the status of one case is not available in the public domain. Out of the 14 cases decided by the NHRC, 12 cases were closed, finding no foul play on the part of the police, and one case was transferred to the UP State Human Rights Commission. In only one case, the NHRC held that the deceased was killed in a ‘fake encounter’ by the police. The other inquiries by the NHRC overlook the factual contradictions and inconsistencies in the police narrative. It also turns a blind eye to violations of procedural and substantive law, for instance, the registration of all FIRs against the deceased victims and no FIRs against the police; closing the investigation on the grounds of the police version of self­-defence, no judicial determination of the justification of self­-defence, violations in the collection and securing of evidence from the scene of the crime, often done by police officers belonging to the same Police Station as the police involved in the killings.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">9. The burden of ensuring investigation and accountability falls entirely on the victims’ families. The families face intimidation, threats, and persecution through false and fabricated criminal cases. At least 13 letters have been submitted to the NHRC about the persecution by the state and non-­state actors of the victim families and human rights defenders providing legal aid and support to the families. The NHRC neither responded to nor took on record the letters pertaining to the persecution of victims’ families. It directed inquiries in cases of the persecution of human rights defenders but closed those inquiries as well.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">10. This <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Extinguishing%20Law%20and%20Life.pdf">report</a> lays bare the abject failure of the criminal justice system to ensure accountability for police killings. It shows how the justice system is unable to hold police officers to account for use of force causing death. It exposes the ambiguities and gaps in the Supreme Court’s guidelines in PUCL v. State of Maharashtra, which is effectively translating, in practice, into impunity for killings. These include introducing ambiguity on FIRs to be registered against the police, introducing vagueness which allows the plea of self­-defence to be misused by the police and claimed at the stage of investigation instead of a trial, ambiguity regarding mandatory inquiry by a judicial magistrate into police killings, and the improbable expectation of a fair and independent investigation by the state police department into crimes by their own colleagues.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p>Kindly click <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/over-2-57-lakh-evicted-in-india-during-the-pandemic-21-people-evicted-from-their-homes-every-hour-says-new-report.html">here</a>, <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Forced_Evictions_2020%20report.pdf">here</a> and <a href="/upload/files/Key%20findings%20forced%20eviction%20report.jpg">here</a> to access the key findings of the report titled [inside]Forced Evictions in India in 2020: A Grave Human Rights Crisis During the Pandemic (released on 9th September, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p><strong>----</strong></p> <p>Please <a href="/upload/files/SPIR%202020-21%20Vol%20II%20%5BExecutive%20Summary%5D%20%28English%29.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Key takeaways of the Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume II): Policing in the Covid-19 Pandemic (released on 16 August, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p>Kindly <a href="/upload/files/SPIR%202020-2021%20Vol.%20II%20Policing%20in%20the%20Covid-19%20Pandemic.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume II): Policing in the Covid-19 Pandemic (released on 16 August, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">---</span></strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="/upload/files/SPIR%202020-21%20Vol%20I%20%28Key%20takeaways%29%20English.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Key takeaways of the Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume I): Policing in Conflict-Affected Regions (released on 19 April, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Kindly <a href="/upload/files/SPIR-2020-2021-Vol%20I%281%29.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume I): Policing in Conflict-Affected Regions (released on 19 April, 2021)[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-21 (Volume I): Policing in Conflict-Affected Regions, gathers and evaluates original data on policing under extraordinary circumstances. It has been divided into two parts: First, a study of policing in conflict-affected areas and second, a study of policing during the Covid-19 pandemic. The studies present policy-oriented insights into the everyday working of the police in India. It is brought to you by Common Cause and the Lokniti Programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and is backed by our philanthropic partners, Tata Trusts and the Lal Family Foundation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The first part of the SPIR 2020- 21 is focused on districts and states affected by some form of conflict, extremism, or insurgency while the second part looks at the preparedness of the cops against disasters in general and health emergencies in particular. Both the studies combine perceptions and performance about policing, in essence, a continuation of the SPIR 2018 and 2019. The earlier reports were focused on citizens’ trust and satisfaction with the police and their adequacy, attitudes and working conditions.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The present study also surveys both the police personnel and common citizens using separate teams and questionnaires in different geographies. It is well-known that everything about policing at the conflict areas—from jurisdictions to the line of command—is affected by the presence of the Army or the para-military forces under stringent legal provisions. It is equally true that the presence of armed underground outfits changes the nature of politics and society in conflict areas. This report aims to understand how policing is carried out in disturbed areas and if there are any lessons in it for policymakers. The study also looks at how conflict situations affect normal crime, its investigation and resolution. It unravels the attitudes of police personnel, their working conditions, training and preparedness as also their relationships with various stakeholders of the conflict.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">For this study, a total of 6,881 individuals (2,276 police personnel and 4,605 civilians), across 27 districts in 11 states and Union Territories were surveyed. The conflict-affected districts were selected from amongst the list of disturbed areas provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs and where incidents of violence have been reported consistently in the presence of the Army or the paramilitary forces. The report also analyses official data released by government agencies.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">During 2020 at least 228 journalists (including two cases against media houses) were targeted. These included 12 female journalists who had faced physical violence, online harassment/ threats and cases including under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) of 1967. Please click <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020.pdf" title="/upload/files/India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020.pdf">here</a>, <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Press%20release%20India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf" title="/upload/files/Press%20release%20India%20Press%20Freedom%20Report%202020%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf">here</a> and <a href="http://www.rightsrisks.org/banner/india-press-freedom-report-2020/" title="http://www.rightsrisks.org/banner/india-press-freedom-report-2020/">here</a> to access the report titled [inside]India Press Freedom Report 2020 (released on 30th July, 2021)[/inside] by Rights and Risks Analysis Group (RRAG).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Kindly click <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Summary%20Media%E2%80%99s%20Crackdown%20During%20COVID-19%20Lockdown%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0kEM80fONm76qG47V-MWZxF8HNc8M3e0C37_LBJAjBP00QlqE4y03MRTU" title="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Summary%20Media%E2%80%99s%20Crackdown%20During%20COVID-19%20Lockdown%20_%20Rights%20%26%20Risks%20Analysis%20Group.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0kEM80fONm76qG47V-MWZxF8HNc8M3e0C37_LBJAjBP00QlqE4y03MRTU">here</a> and <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Media%20Crackdown%20Report%20by%20Rights%20and%20Risks.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3t5uYxnwpCkhEqRqlwIMwW_Hf8OxxgPERRYzR6dV9UD_yHN5M6pDOTkVw" title="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Media%20Crackdown%20Report%20by%20Rights%20and%20Risks.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3t5uYxnwpCkhEqRqlwIMwW_Hf8OxxgPERRYzR6dV9UD_yHN5M6pDOTkVw">here</a> to access the main findings of the report titled [inside]India: Media’s Crackdown During COVID-19 Lockdown (released on 15th June, 2020)[/inside] by Rights and Risks Analysis Group (RRAG).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">---</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Standing%20Committee%20Report%20on%20The%20DNA%20Technology%20%28Use%20And%20Application%29%20Regulation%20Bill%2C%202019.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Parliamentary Standing Commmittee Report on The DNA Technology (Use And Application) Regulation Bill, 2019[/inside], which was presented to the Rajya Sabha on 3rd February, 2021 and laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on 3rd February, 2021. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Some of the key concerns, which have been raised about The DNA Technology (Use And Application) Regulation Bill, 2019, are as follows:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">1. Misuse of Sensitive DNA Information: can reveal extremely sensitive information about individuals [family ancestry (pedigree), skin colour, behaviour, illness, health status and susceptibility to diseases].</p> <p style="text-align:justify">2. Access to such intrusive information can be misused to specifically target individuals and their families using their genetic data. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">3. Can be misused for caste/ community-based profiling. Needless to say, DNA based profiling would amount to violation of human rights and it could also compromise the privacy of the individuals. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">4. The lawful and effective use of DNA technology is subject to its harnessing by trained and reliable officials and experts, making use of equipment, tools and technology, operational protocols and sampling methods. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">5. The integrity of the process is critical: Vulnerable to manipulation, mislabelling and contamination by accident or design. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">6. International best practices suggest that there must be an independent regulator of data to supervise and maintain checks on laboratory quality and examination of the crime scene and accordingly submit reports to the government. The Regulatory Body proposed here seems to meet the requirements, subject to appropriate checks and balances. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">7. Physical and cyber security of DNA Database-Bank/ security of a huge number of DNA profiles is critical. The Bill requires provisions for appropriate firewalls and cyber defence. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">8. Most importantly, protocols establishing a trusted chain of custody of samples, reliable and clearly defined processes for analysis, and proper use of expert evidence in court are critical to ensure their evidentiary value. Any gaps in chain of custody will cast suspicion on the integrity of the sample itself. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">9. Appropriate standards for laboratory quality assurance and crime scene examination need to be developed and published.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">The Supreme Court on 30th June, 2021 ordered the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to frame guidelines for payment of ex gratia compensation to family members of persons who succumbed to Covid-19. Kindly <a href="/upload/files/SC%20order%20on%20Ex%20Gratia%20compensation%20reepak-kansal-vs-union-of-india-ll-2021-sc-277-395793.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Supreme Court judgement dated 30th June 2021, which is related to the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 539 of 2021 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 554 of 2021[/inside].</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please click <a href="https://www.im4change.org/latest-news-updates/eminent-individuals-oppose-the-appointment-of-justice-arun-mishra-as-chairperson-of-nhrc.html">here</a> and <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/PUCL%20final_press_note_2nd_june_NHRC_final.pdf">here</a> to access the [inside]Press release by People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) dated 2nd June, 2021[/inside] in which it opposed the appointment of Justice Arun Mishra as Chairperson of NHRC.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/Key%20takeaways.pdf">click here</a> and <a href="https://www.im4change.org/latest-news-updates/the-rule-of-law-is-indeed-backsliding-in-india-says-justice-madan-b-lokur.html">here</a> to access the key findings of the [inside]Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-2021, Volume-I[/inside], which is a study on policing in conflict-affected areas. Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/SPIR-2020-2021-Vol%20I.pdf">click here</a> to access the entire Status of Policing in India Report (SPIR) 2020-2021, Volume-I, released on 19th April, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Kindly <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/INDIA-2020-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf" title="/upload/files/INDIA-2020-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]India 2020 Country Report on Human Rights Practices (released on 30th March, 2021)[/inside] by Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, United States Department of State.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Significant human rights issues included in the report: unlawful and arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings perpetrated by police; torture and cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by some police and prison officials; arbitrary arrest and detention by government authorities; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; political prisoners or detainees in certain states; restrictions on freedom of expression and the press, including violence, threats of violence, or unjustified arrests or prosecutions against journalists, use of criminal libel laws to prosecute social media speech, censorship, and site blocking; overly restrictive rules on nongovernmental organizations; restrictions on political participation; widespread corruption at all levels in the government; lack of investigation of and accountability for violence against women; tolerance of violations of religious freedom; crimes involving violence and discrimination targeting members of minority groups including women based on religious affiliation or social status; and forced and compulsory child labor, as well as bonded labor.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Despite government efforts to address abuses, a lack of accountability for official misconduct persisted at all levels of government, contributing to widespread impunity. Investigations and prosecutions of individual cases took place, but lax enforcement, a shortage of trained police officers, and an overburdened and underresourced court system contributed to a low number of convictions.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Separatist insurgents and terrorists in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, the Northeast, and Maoist-affected areas committed serious abuses, including killings and torture of armed forces personnel, police, government officials, and civilians, and recruitment and use of child soldiers.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The government continued taking steps to restore normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir by gradually lifting some security and communications restrictions. The government released most political activists from detention. In January the government partially restored internet access; however, high-speed 4G mobile internet remained restricted in most parts of Jammu and Kashmir. The government began a process to redraw electoral constituencies but did not announce a timeline for local assembly elections. Local district development council elections took place in December in which a coalition of Kashmiri opposition parties won the majority of seats.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/SASM2020-FullReport.pdf">click here</a> to access the report entitled [inside]The South Asia State of Minorities Report 2020: Minorities and Shrinking Civic Space (released in December 2020)[/inside] by the South Asia Collective.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://www.im4change.org/upload/files/Press%20Release%20FINAL%20NCRB%20Analysis.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Analysis of Crime in India 2019 report[/inside] by National Coalition for Strengthening SCs and STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (NCSPA) and National Dalit Movement for Justice (NDMJ), dated 1st October, 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/SPIR%202019%20Press%20Release%2027082019%20-%20BW.pdf">click here</a> to access the key findings of the [inside] Status of Policing in India Report 2019[/inside]: Police Adequacy and Working Conditions, Common Cause and Lokniti Programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), Tata Trusts and Lal Family Foundation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Release%20Status%20of%20Policing%20in%20India%20Report%202018.pdf">click here</a> to access the key findings of the [inside] Status of Policing in India Report 2018[/inside]: A Study of Performance and Perceptions, Common Cause, Lokniti Programme of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), Tata Trusts and Lal Family Foundation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">The judgement by Supreme Court judges Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit (dated 20 March, 2018, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/22086_2017_Judgement_20-Mar-2018.pdf" title="SC ST Act judgement">click here</a> to access) pertaining to Criminal Appeal No. 416 of 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5661 of 2017), among other things, says that:<br /> <br /> • In view of acknowledged abuse of law of arrest in cases under [inside]The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989)[/inside], arrest of a public servant can only be after approval of the appointing authority and of a non-public servant after approval by the Senior Superintendent of Police (S.S.P.) which may be granted in appropriate cases if considered necessary for reasons recorded. Such reasons must be scrutinized by the Magistrate for permitting further detention.<br /> <br /> • To avoid false implication of an innocent, a preliminary enquiry may be conducted by the D.S.P. concerned to find out whether the allegations make out a case under The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989) and that the allegations are not frivolous or motivated.<br /> <br /> • To avoid false implication, before a First Information Report (FIR) is registered, preliminary enquiry may be made (as mentioned above) whether the case falls in the parameters of The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989) and is not frivolous or motivated.<br /> <br /> • There is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989) if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny the complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">-- </p> <div style="text-align:justify">The press release by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment dated 25 January, 2016 (please <a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=135764">click here</a> to access) says that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 to ensure more stringent provisions for prevention of Atrocities against Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes will be enforced with effect from January 26, 2016.<br /> </div> <p style="text-align:justify">Consequent upon passing of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Bill, 2015 by the Lok Sabha on August 04,2015 and Rajya Sabha on December 21, 2015, to make amendments in the Principal Act, namely, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) {PoA} Act, 1989, the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, as assented by the President on December 31, 2015, was notified in the Gazette of India Extraordinary on January 01, 2016. After framing the rules for enactment, now it will be enforced by the Central Government with effect from January 26, 2016.<br /> <br /> The key features of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (please <a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=135764">click here</a> to access), are:<br /> <br /> • New offences of atrocities like tonsuring of head, moustache, or similar acts which are derogatory to the dignity of members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, garlanding with chappals, denying access to irrigation facilities or forest rights , dispose or carry human or animal carcasses, or to dig graves, using or permitting manual scavenging, dedicating a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe women as devadasi, abusing in caste name, perpetrating witchcraft atrocities, imposing social or economic boycott, preventing Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates from filing of nomination to contest elections, hurting a Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes woman by removing her garments, forcing a member of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe to leave house , village or residence, defiling objects sacred to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe, touching or using words, acts or gestures of a sexual nature against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe.<br /> <br /> • Addition of certain IPC offences like hurt, grievous hurt, intimidation, kidnapping etc., attracting less than ten years of imprisonment, committed against members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, as offences punishable under the PoA Act. Presently, only those offences listed in IPC as attracting punishment of 10 years or more and committed on members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe are accepted as offences falling under the PoA Act.<br /> <br /> • Establishment of Exclusive Special Courts and specification of Exclusive Special Public Prosecutors also, to exclusively try the offences under the PoA Act to enable speedy and expeditious disposal of cases.<br /> <br /> • Power of Special Courts and Exclusive Special Courts, to take direct cognizance of offence and as far as possible, completion of trial of the case within two months, from the date of filing of the charge sheet.<br /> <br /> • Addition of chapter on the ‘Rights of Victims and Witnesses’.<br /> <br /> • Defining clearly the term ‘wilful negligence’ of public servants at all levels, starting from the registration of complaint, and covering aspects of dereliction of duty under this Act.<br /> <br /> • Addition of presumption to the offences –If the accused was acquainted with the victim or his family, the court will presume that the accused was aware of the caste or tribal identity of the victim unless proved otherwise.<br /> <br /> According to <u><span style="color:#0000ff">vikaspedia.in</span></u>, the key features of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (please <a href="http://vikaspedia.in/social-welfare/scheduled-caste-welfare-1/the-scheduled-castes-and-the-scheduled-tribes-prevention-of-atrocities-amendment-act-2015">click here</a> to access), are:<br /> <br /> • <strong>Actions to be treated as offences -</strong> The Act outlines actions (by non SCs and STs) against SCs or STs to be treated as offences. The Amendment Act amends certain existing categories and adds new categories of actions to be treated as offences. New offences added under the Act include: (a) garlanding with footwear, (b) compelling to dispose or carry human or animal carcasses, or do manual scavenging, (c) abusing SCs or STs by caste name in public, (d) attempting to promote feelings of ill-will against SCs or STs or disrespecting any deceased person held in high esteem, and (e) imposing or threatening a social or economic boycott.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Assaulting or sexual exploiting an SC or ST woman is an offence under the Act -</strong> The Amendment Act adds that: (a) intentionally touching an SC or ST woman in a sexual manner without her consent, or (b) using words, acts or gestures of a sexual nature, or (c) dedicating an SC or ST women as a devadasi to a temple, or any similar practice will also be considered an offence. Consent is defined as a voluntary agreement through verbal or non-verbal communication.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Preventing SCs or STs from undertaking the following activities will be considered an offence -</strong> (a) using common property resources, (c) entering any place of worship that is open to the public, and (d) entering an education or health institution.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Addition of presumption to the offences – </strong>The court shall presume that the accused was aware of the caste or tribal identity of the victim if the accused had personal knowledge of the victim or his family, unless the contrary is proved.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Role of public servants - </strong>The Act specifies that a non SC or ST public servant who neglects his/her duties relating to SCs or STs shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term of six months to one year. The Amendment Act specifies these duties, including: (a) registering a complaint or FIR, (b) reading out information given orally, before taking the signature of the informant and giving a copy of this information to the informant, etc.<br /> <br /> • Addition of certain IPC offences like hurt, grievous hurt, intimidation, kidnapping etc., attracting less than ten years of imprisonment, committed against members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe, as offences punishable under the PoA Act. Presently, only those offences listed in IPC as attracting punishment of 10 years or more and committed on members of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe are accepted as offences falling under the PoA Act.<br /> <br /> • Establishment of Exclusive Special Courts and specification of Exclusive Special Public Prosecutors also, to exclusively try the offences under the PoA Act to enable speedy and expeditious disposal of cases.<br /> <br /> • <strong>Rights of victims and witnesses -</strong> The Amendment Act adds a chapter on the rights of victims and witness. It shall be the duty of the state to make arrangements for the protection of victims, their dependants and witnesses. The state government shall specify a scheme to ensure the implementation of rights of victims and witnesses.<br /> <br /> • The courts established under the Act may take measures such as: (a) concealing the names of witnesses, (b) taking immediate action in respect of any complaint relating to harassment of a victim, informant or witness, etc. Any such complaint shall be tried separately from the main case and be concluded within two months.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="http://ncsc.nic.in/files/PoA%20Amendment%20Rules,%202016.pdf">click here</a> to access the Rules related to The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Amendment Act (2015). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/SCST%20Prevention%20of%20Atrocities%20Act%202015.pdf" title="SC ST Prevention of Atrocities Amendment Act 2015">click here</a> to access the The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Amendment Act (2015). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/poarules.pdf" title="PoA Rules SC ST">click here</a> to access the Rules related to The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/The%20Scheduled%20Caste%20and%20the%20Scheduled%20Tribes%20Prevention%20Of%20Atrocities%20Act%201989.pdf" title="The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes Prevention Of Atrocities Act 1989">click here</a> to access The Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act (1989).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report entitled [inside]Crime in India 2016 Statistics (released in November, 2017)[/inside], which has been published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a> :<br /> <br /> <em>Human Rights Violation</em><br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of cases registered against police personnel for human rights violation was 209 in 2016. However, 73 cases were found to be false. The total number of police personnel charge-sheeted for human rights violation was 50 in that year. No police personnel was convicted for human rights violation in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The total number of criminal cases registered against police personnel during 2016 was 3082 at the national-level.<br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of deaths in police custody was 92 in 2016, out of which 8 can be attributed to injuries sustained during the police custody due to physical assault by police, 1 can be attributed to injuries sustained prior to police custody, 1 can be attributed to mob attack/ riots, 2 can be attributed to assault by other criminals, 38 can be attributed to suicide, 4 can be attributed to while escaping from police custody, 28 can be attributed to illness, 7 can be attributed to natural deaths, 1 can be attributed to road accident/ journey connected to investigation, and 2 can be attributed to other reasons.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) during 2016 was 60. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) during 2016 was 32. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2016 was 92 and 351, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2016 was 35 and 759, respectively.<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against women</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 55.2 in 2016, which was 54.2 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against women = (Incidences of Crimes against Women divided by Female Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Female Population<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime cases (IPC+SLL) against women in 2016, most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (14.5 percent), followed by West Bengal (9.6 percent), Maharashtra (9.3 percent) and Rajasthan (8.1 percent).<br /> <br /> • Among the states, the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women in 2016 has been the highest in Assam (131.3 crimes per lakh women population), followed by Odisha (84.5) and Telangana (83.7). Among the Union Territories (UTs), the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women has been the highest in Delhi UT (160.4 in 2016).<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been the highest in Sikkim (30.3), followed by Delhi UT (22.6) and Arunachal Pradesh (14.7). In 94.6 percent of rape cases (under Section 376 IPC and Section 376 IPC read with Section 4 & 6 of POCSO Act) during 2016, the offenders were known to the victims.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been 6.3 in 2016 at the national level. The number of such cases reported has been 38,947 in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The number of rape cases reported has increased by 12.4 percent from 34,651 cases in 2015 to 38,947 in 2016. Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh reported the highest incidence of rape with 4,882 cases (12.5 percent) and 4,816 (12.4 percent) respectively, followed by 4,189 such cases in Maharashtra (10.7 percent) during 2016.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to 'Assault on Women with intent to outrage her Modesty' has been 13.8 in 2016. The number of such cases reported has been 84,746 in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to 'Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives' has been 18.0 in 2016. The number of such cases reported has been 1,10,378 in 2016.<br /> <br /> • The cases under Crimes Against Women have reported an increase of 2.9 percent in 2016 (3,38,954) over 2015 (3,29,243). The majority of cases under crimes against women were reported under ‘Cruelty by Husband or His Relatives’ (32.6 percent), followed by ‘Assault on Women with Intent to Outrage her Modesty’ (25.0 percent), ‘Kidnaping & Abduction of Women’ (19.0 percent) and ‘Rape’ (11.5 percent).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against children</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has increased from 20.1 in 2014 to 21.1 in 2015 and further to 24.0 percent in 2016. The rate of total cognizable Crime against children = (Total Incidences of Crimes against children divided by Children Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Children Population<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in 2016 has been the highest in Delhi UT (146.0), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (61.4), Chandigarh (55.5) and Sikkim (55.0).<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported on infanticide has been the highest in Uttar Pradesh (21) followed by Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh (both 14) during 2016. The number of cases reported about foeticide has been the highest in Uttar Pradesh (52) followed by Rajasthan (21) and Madhya Pradesh (19) during 2016.<br /> <br /> • Crimes against children have shown an increasing trend over the past 3 years with a significant increase of 13.6 percent (1,06,958) in 2016 over (94,172) 2015. Kidnapping and abduction of children accounted for 52.3 percent of the cases, followed by cases reported under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act i.e. 34.4 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the total victims trafficked in 2016 (i.e. 15,379), nearly 58.7 percent victims (male: 4,123; female: 4,911) were below 18 years.<br /> <br /> • Most number of victims below 18 years who were trafficked in 2016 belonged to the state of West Bengal (3,113), followed by Rajasthan (2,519) and Uttar Pradesh (822)<br /> <br /> • Out of the total victims of rape in 2016 (i.e. 39,068), nearly 1.3 percent victims were below 6 years, 4.1 percent victims were 6 years & above but below 12 years, 15.6 percent victims were 12 years & above but below 16 Years, and 22.2 percent victims were 16 years & above but below 18 Years. It means that 43.2 percent of total rape victims in 2016 were aged below 18 years. <br /> <br /> <em>Crime against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in India has declined from 20.1 in 2014 to 19.2 in 2015 but increased to 20.3 in 2016. The rate of total cognizable Crime against SCs = (Total cases reported under crime against SCs divided by Total Population of SCs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of SCs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in 2016 has been the highest in Madhya Pradesh (43.4), followed by Rajasthan (42.0) and Goa (36.7).<br /> <br /> • The atrocities/ crime against Scheduled Castes have increased by 5.5 percent in 2016 (40,801) over 2015 (38,670).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against SCs in 2016, most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (25.6 percent), followed by Bihar (14.0 percent) and Rajasthan (12.6 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in India has fallen from 6.5 in 2014 to 6.0 in 2015 but increased to 6.3 percent in 2016. The rate of total cognizable Crime against STs = (Total cases reported under crime against STs divided by Total Population of STs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of STs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in 2016 has been the highest in Kerala (37.5), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (21.0) and Andhra Pradesh (15.4).<br /> <br /> • Atrocities/ Crime Against Scheduled Tribes have increased by 4.7 percent in 2016 (6,568) over 2015 (6,276).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against STs in 2016, most were committed in Madhya Pradesh (27.8 percent), followed by Rajasthan (18.2 percent) and Odisha (10.4 percent).<br /> <br /> <strong>Note:</strong><br /> <br /> • The National Crime Records Bureau follows ‘Principal Offence Rule’ for counting of crime. Hence among many offences covered in a single registered criminal case, only most heinous crime in the registered case has been considered as counting unit representing that case. Hence, there is likelihood of some Indian Penal Code (IPC)/ Special & Local Laws (SLL) cases getting under reported as they are hidden under major IPC crimes i.e. Murder with Rape is accounted as Murder & Dowry Prohibition Act when applied along with 304B of IPC will be counted as Dowry Death only.<br /> <br /> • The Principle Offence Rule is not applicable for chapters of Crimes against Women, Crimes Against Children, Crimes Against SC/ST, juveniles in conflict with law, crime against senior citizens etc.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Based on data and statistics from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD), the PRS Legislative Research has come out with a report. The key findings of the report entitled [inside]Police Reforms in India (June 2017)[/inside], which has been authored by Anviti Chaturvedi are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Police%20reforms%20in%20India.pdf" title="Police reforms in India ">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> • An expert committee under the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation has noted in its report (entitled <em>Report of the Committee on Crime Statistics</em>, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2012) that there is significant under-reporting of crimes under the NCRB for various reasons. For example, there could be suppression of data and low registration of crimes because the police know that their work is judged on the basis of this information. Also, sometimes victims of crime may decide against reporting the incident with the police because they are afraid to approach the police, or think the crime is not serious enough, etc. Also, note that the NCRB follows the ‘principal offence rule’ for counting crime. This means that if many offences are covered in a single registered criminal case, the NCRB will only count the most heinous of the offences. For instance, a case of murder and rape, will only be counted as a case of murder (i.e. principal offence) by the NCRB.<br /> <br /> • Police personnel discharge a range of functions related to: (i) crime prevention and response (e.g., intelligence collection, patrolling, investigation, production of witnesses in courts), (ii) maintenance of internal security and law and order (e.g., crowd control, riot control, anti-terrorist or anti-extremist operations), and (iii) various miscellaneous duties (e.g., traffic management, disaster rescue and removal of encroachments). Each police officer is also responsible for a large segment of people, given India’s low police strength per lakh population as compared to international standards. While the United Nations recommended standard is 222 police per lakh persons, India’s sanctioned strength is 181 police per lakh persons. After adjusting for vacancies, the actual police strength in India is at 137 police per lakh persons. Therefore, an average policeman ends up having an enormous workload and long working hours, which negatively affects his efficiency and performance.<br /> <br /> • In 2015, the National Crime Records Bureau recorded over 73 lakh complaints of cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to investigate, such as murder and rape. Between 2005 and 2015, crime rate (i.e., crime per lakh population) for cognizable crimes has increased by 28% from 456 complaints per lakh persons to 582 per lakh persons. This has been primarily because of increase in crime rates of alcohol-prohibition crime, theft, kidnapping and abduction, crimes against women and cheating.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to the report entitled [inside]Crime in India 2015 Statistics (released in 2016)[/inside], which has been published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a> :<br /> <br /> <em>Human Rights Violation</em><br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of cases registered against State Police and Central Paramilitary Forces for human rights violation was 94 in 2015. However, 12 cases were found to be false. The total number of police personnel charge-sheeted for human rights violation was 34 in that year. No police personnel was convicted for human rights violation in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The total number of criminal cases registered against police personnel during 2015 was 5526 at the national-level. It must be noted that the complaints against police personnel exclude human rights violation by police but these crime may be related to family/ domestic complaints, etc.<br /> <br /> • At the national-level, the total number of deaths in police custody was 97 in 2015, out of which 6 can be attributed to injuries sustained during the police custody due to physical assault by police, 6 can be attributed to injuries sustained prior to police custody, 1 can be attributed to mob attack/ riots, 3 can be attributed to assault by other criminals, 34 can be attributed to suicide, 5 can be attributed to while escaping from police custody, 11 can be attributed to illness, 9 can be attributed to natural deaths, 1 can be attributed to road accident/ journey connected to investigation, 12 can be attributed to hospitalization and 9 can be attributed to other reasons.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) during 2015 was 67. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons not remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The total number of death or disappearance reported in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) during 2015 was 30. The total number of policemen convicted for death or disappearance in police custody/ lockup (of persons remanded to police custody by Court) was zero in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2015 was 42 and 39, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2015 was 7 and 298, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The number of civilians killed and injured by terrorists or militants during 2015 was 19 and 67, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The number of civilians killed and injured by Naxalites or Left-Wing Extremists during 2015 was 11 and 23, respectively.<br /> <br /> • The number of civilians killed and injured during riots in 2015 were 6 and 292, respectively.<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against women</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 53.9 in 2015, which was 56.3 in 2014. The rate of total cognizable Crime against women = (Incidences of Crimes against Women divided by Female Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Female Population<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against women, in 2015 most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (10.9 percent), followed by West Bengal (10.1 percent), Maharashtra (9.5 percent) and Rajasthan (8.6 percent).<br /> <br /> • Among the states, the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women in 2015 has been the highest in Assam (148.2 crimes per lakh women population), followed by Telengana (83.1), Odisha (81.9) and Rajasthan (81.5). Among the Union Territories (UTs), the rate of total cognizable crimes committed against women has been the highest in Delhi UT (184.3 in 2015, which was 169.1 in 2014). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has been the highest in Delhi UT (23.7), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (13.5) and Chhattisgarh (12.2). In 95.5 percent of rape cases (under Section 376 IPC) during 2015, the offenders were known to the victims.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The rate of cognizable crime relating to rape has gone up from 3.5 in 2004 to 6.1 in 2014 but declined marginally to 5.7 in 2015. The number of cases reported about such crime has almost doubled from 18,233 in 2004 to 34,651 in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to Assault on women with intent to outrage her Modesty has gone up from 6.6 in 2004 to 13.7 in 2014 but declined marginally to 13.6. The number of cases reported about such crime has more than doubled from 34,567 in 2004 to 82,422 in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The rate of cognizable crime relating to Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives has almost doubled from 11.1 in 2004 to 20.5 in 2014 but fell marginally to 18.7 in 2015. The number of cases reported about such crime has increased from 58,121 in 2004 to 1,22,877 in 2014 but declined to 1,13,403 in 2015.<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported about the crime of Insult to Modesty of Women (Section 509 IPC) at Office Premises has been the highest in Delhi UT (36), followed by Telengana (32) and Maharashtra (27).<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported about the crime of Insult to Modesty of Women (Section 509 IPC) in Public Transport System has been the highest in Telengana (179) followed by Maharashtra (28).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against children</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has increased from 20.1 in 2014 to 21.1 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against children = (Total Incidences of Crimes against children divided by Children Population) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh of Children Population<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in 2015 has been the highest in Delhi UT (169.4), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (75), Chandigarh (67.8) and Mizoram (50.1).<br /> <br /> • The number of cases reported about infanticide has been highest in Madhya Pradesh (25) followed by Rajasthan (18) during 2015. The number of cases reported about foeticide has been the highest in Madhya Pradesh (17), followed by Haryana (14) and Rajasthan (13) during 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> • In 94.8 percent of rape cases (under Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act) during 2015, the offenders were known to the raped child victims.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> <em>Crime against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in India has declined from 23.4 in 2014 to 22.3 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against SCs = (Total cases reported under crime against SCs divided by Total Population of SCs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of SCs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in 2015 has been the highest in Rajasthan (57.3), followed by Andhra Pradesh (52.3) and Goa (51.1).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against SCs, in 2015 most were committed in Uttar Pradesh (18.6 percent), followed by Rajasthan (15.6 percent) and Bihar (14.3 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in India has fallen from 11.0 in 2014 to 10.5 in 2015. The rate of total cognizable Crime against STs = (Total cases reported under crime against STs divided by Total Population of STs) multiplied by 100000 i.e. Incidence of Crime per one lakh population of STs.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in 2015 has been the highest in Kerala (36.3) followed by Rajasthan (34.7) and Andhra Pradesh (27.3).<br /> <br /> • In terms of percentage share to total crime against STs, in 2015 most were committed in Rajasthan (29.4 percent), followed by Madhya Pradesh (14 percent) and Chhattisgarh (13.9 percent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Note: </strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> • The National Crime Records Bureau follows ‘Principal Offence Rule’ for counting of crime. Hence among many offences covered in a single registered criminal case, only most heinous crime in the registered case has been considered as counting unit representing that case.<br /> <br /> • The Socio-economic causative factors or reasons of crimes are not being captured by the NCRB. Only police registered criminal cases are being captured for this publication.<br /> <br /> • Analysis of crimes in all the chapters in this report has been done on the basis of First Information Report (FIR), as registered by police.<br /> <br /> • In some crime heads, figures of persons arrested/ charge-sheeted/ convicted/etc. may be less than the corresponding registered cases, as accused might not have been arrested or died etc.<br /> <br /> • For some crime heads, cases/ persons pending for investigation or trials brought forward in 2015 may not match with the previous year data (2014), due to change/ modification of sections of that crime heads under the revised proformae.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report entitled [inside]Crime in India 2014 by National Crime Records Bureau (released in 2015)[/inside], <a href="http://www.ncrb.nic.in">www.ncrb.nic.in</a>: <br /> <br /> <em>Crime against women*</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against women in India has been 56.3.<br /> <br /> • Most crimes against women in 2014 were committed in Uttar Pradesh (11.4 percent), followed by West Bengal (11.3 percent), Rajasthan (9.2 percent), Madhya Pradesh (8.5 percent) and Maharashtra (7.9 percent).<br /> <br /> • Among the states, the rate of total cognizable crimes against women in 2014 has been the highest in Assam (123.4 crimes per lakh women population), followed by Rajasthan (91.4), Tripura (88) and West Bengal (85.4). Among the Union Territories (UTs), the rate of total cognizable crimes against women has been the highest in Delhi UT (169.1). <br /> <br /> • The rate of crime relating to rape has gone up from 3.5 in 2004 to 6.1 in 2014. The incidence of such crime has almost doubled from 18,233 in 2004 to 36,735 in 2014.<br /> <br /> • In 2014, most victims of incest rape were in the age group 12-16 years (29.6 percent), followed by the age group 18-30 years (28.5 percent). Incest Rape include rape by blood relatives like Grandfather/ Father/ Brother/ Son etc. In 2014, most victims of rape (also includes incest rape) were in the age group 18-30 years (43.8 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of crime relating to Assault on women with intent to outrage her Modesty has gone up from 6.6 in 2004 to 13.7 in 2014. The incidence of such crime has increased from 34,567 in 2004 to 82,235 in 2014.<br /> <br /> • The rate of crime relating to Cruelty by Husband or his Relatives has almost doubled from 11.1 in 2004 to 20.5 in 2014. The incidence of such crime has increased from 58,121 in 2004 to 1,22,877 in 2014.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime relating to human trafficking in 2014 has been the highest in Daman & Diu (2.6), followed by Andaman & Nicobar Islands (2.2). Among states, the rate of total cognizable crime in human trafficking has been highest Haryana and Assam (both 1.3), followed by West Bengal & Goa (both 1.2).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against children</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in India has been 20.1.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against children in 2014 has been the highest in Delhi UT (166.9), followed by Goa (63.5). <br /> <br /> • The incidence of infanticide has been the highest in Rajasthan (33) during 2014. The incidence of foeticide has been the highest in Madhya Pradesh (30), followed by Rajasthan (24).<br /> <br /> <em>Crime against Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs)</em><br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in India has been 23.4.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against SCs in 2014 has been the highest in Goa (66.8), followed by Rajasthan (65.7).<br /> <br /> • Most crimes against SCs in 2014 were committed in Uttar Pradesh (17.2 percent), followed by Rajasthan (17.1 percent) and Bihar (16.8 percent).<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in India has been 11.0.<br /> <br /> • The rate of total cognizable crime committed against STs in 2014 has been the highest in Rajasthan (42.8), followed by Kerala (27.8), Andaman & Nicobar Islands (24.5) and Andhra Pradesh (23.8).<br /> <br /> • Most crimes against STs in 2014 were committed in Rajasthan (34.5 percent), followed by Madhya Pradesh (19.9 percent), Odisha (11 percent) and Chhattisgarh (6.3 percent).<br /> <br /> <strong>Note: </strong><br /> <br /> * Crime rate against a particular community is the ratio of total number of crimes committed or reported in a year against that community to the population of that community (in lakhs). It is calculated to compare crime rates across various regions and also for inter-temporal comparison.<br /> <br /> Crime rate for crime against women, crime against children, crime against SCs/STs and crime senior citizens have been calculated using population of female, children (upto 18 years), SCs/STs and persons(60 years & above of age). </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report [inside]Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2014[/inside] by United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), (please <a href="http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/glotip/GLOTIP_2014_full_report.pdf">click here</a> to access the report):<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Indian Scenario</em></strong><br /> <br /> • A bit more than 40% of the persons investigated for trafficking in persons in India were females.<br /> <br /> • India has detected victims from other countries in the subregion, particularly Nepal and Bangladesh. Victims trafficked from other areas– for example Eastern Europe - have also been detected in India, but only sporadically.<br /> <br /> • Victims from a variety of countries in South-East Asia and the Indian sub-continent are trafficked mainly to the Gulf and other Middle Eastern countries.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Global Scenario</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The present report's data covers the period 2010-2012. Girls make up 2 out of every 3 child victims. And together with women, they account for 70% of overall trafficking victims worldwide.<br /> <br /> • There has been a rise in the share of girl children in the total number of detected victims from 10% in 2004 to 21% in 2011. Similarly, the share of boy children in the total number of detected victims increased from 3% in 2004 to 12% in 2011. However, the share of adult women in the total number of detected victims fell from 74% in 2004 to 49% in 2011.<br /> <br /> • The share of the total number of detected victims who were trafficked for forced labour has increased from 32% in 2007 to 40% in 2011.<br /> <br /> • Between 2010 and 2012, victims with 152 different citizenships were identified in 124 countries across the globe. Moreover, trafficking flows - imaginary lines that connect the same origin country and destination country of at least five detected victims – criss-cross the world. UNODC has identified at least 510 flows.<br /> <br /> • Most victims of trafficking in persons are foreigners in the country where they are identified as victims. In other words, these victims - more than 6 in 10 of all victims - have been trafficked across at least one national border. That said, many trafficking cases involve limited geographic movement as they tend to take place within a subregion (often between neighbouring countries).<br /> <br /> • Domestic trafficking is widely detected, and for one in three trafficking cases, the exploitation takes place in the victim’s country of citizenship.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 49% of detected victims are adult women. Almost 33% of detected victims are children, which is a 5% increase compared to the 2007-2010 period.<br /> <br /> • Trafficking for forced labour - including in the manufacturing and construction sectors, domestic work and textile production - has increased steadily in the past five years. About 35% of the detected victims of trafficking for forced labour are female.<br /> <br /> • No country is immune to trafficking- there are at least 152 countries of origin and 124 countries of destination affected by trafficking in persons, and over 510 trafficking flows criss-crossing the world.<br /> <br /> • Most trafficking flows are interregional, and more than 6 out of 10 victims have been trafficked across at least one national border. The vast majority of convicted traffickers - 72% - are male and citizens of the country in which they operate. Some 64% of convicted traffickers are citizens of the convicting country.<br /> <br /> • There are regional variations as to why people are trafficked in the first place. For example, victims in Europe and Central Asia are mostly trafficked for sexual exploitation, whereas in East Asia and the Pacific forced labour drives the market. In the Americas, the two types are detected in almost equal measure. In some regions - such as Africa and the Middle East - child trafficking is a major concern, with children constituting 62% of victims. In Asia, most of the victims of trafficking for forced labour were women.<br /> <br /> • More than 90% of countries have legislation criminalizing human trafficking since the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, under the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, came into force more than a decade ago.<br /> <br /> • Despite this, impunity remains a serious problem: 40% of countries recorded few or no convictions, and over the past 10 years there has been no discernible increase in the global criminal justice response to this crime, leaving a significant portion of the population vulnerable to offenders.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">For the report Elder Abuse in India (2014), the research pans 12 cities across 8 states with a sample size of 1,200 elders covering both metro (Tier I) and non- metro (Tier II) cities. The report was done to determine the existence of elder abuse, reasons for its occurrence, its extent and what as per elderly were the most effective measures to deal with the problem.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report entitled [inside]Elder Abuse in India (2014)[/inside] by HelpAge India (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Elder%20Abuse%20in%20India%202014.pdf" title="Elder Abuse India 2014">click here</a> to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 2014 the percentage of elders abused went up drastically from 23% in the previous year to 50%.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The elderly victims cite that the primary reasons underlying their abuse are emotional dependence on the abuser (46%), economic dependence on the abuser (45%) and changing ethos (38%).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Verbal Abuse (41%), Disrespect (33%) and Neglect (29%) are ranked as the most common types of abuse experienced by the elderly. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Elders across cities were asked about the abusers within their family. The Daughter-in-law (61%) and Son (59%) emerged as the topmost perpetrators. This is a trend that is continuing from the previous years. Not surprisingly, 77% of those surveyed, live with their families.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Though the national capital of Delhi ranked the lowest in elder abuse with 22 per cent amongst Tier I cities, it also indicated a marginal increase of the same from 20 per cent last year, showing a slow but disturbing growth. Bengaluru ranked the highest at 75 per cent among Tier I cities surveyed, while in the Tier II cities Kanpur was the lowest (13 per cent) and Nagpur highest at 85 per cent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Women seemed to be more vulnerable with 52% of them facing abuse as against 48% of the men surveyed. The report said that while the abuse has gone up, 41% of those abused did not report the matter to anyone.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• An interesting observation about the Reasons for Not Reporting abuse, is that in Metro cities there is marked ‘lack of confidence in the any person or agency to deal with the problem’ and also there seems to be a general feeling of “did not know how to deal with the abuse”. However “Fear of retaliation” appears in 3 out of 6 Tier II cities, unlike the Tier I cities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• All elders surveyed seemed most aware of the police helpline at 67%. In the case of victims the awareness level continues to be high at 64% but only 12% approached the police.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Nationally, the effective mechanisms perceived by all elderly to deal with Elder Abuse include “increasing economic independence of the abused (30%)”, “sensitizing children and strengthening inter-generational bonding (21%)” and “developing Self-Help-Groups of Older Persons to provide assistance and intervention (14%).”</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Many victims both in Tier I & Tier II cities pointed out “Developing an effective legal reporting & redressal system” is an important step for effectively dealing with Elder Abuse.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">[inside]Independent People's Tribunal on the functioning of the National Human Rights Commission[/inside] </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/IPT%20-%20NHRC%20-%20Interim%20observations%20HPT%20Final.pdf">click here</a> to access the Interim observations and recommendation of Jury Panel of the <a href="https://im4change.org/events/independent-peoples-tribunal-on-the-functioning-of-the-national-human-rights-commission-23636.html">Independent People's Tribunal</a> on the Functioning of the NHRC of India. The event took place in School of Social Sciences-1 Auditorium, Jawaharlal Nehru University on 14th, 15th& 16th December 2013.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">On 15th December, 2013 Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) made a submission to the Independent People's Tribunal that was hearing people's perceptions about the working of the National Human Rights Commission on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Protection of Human Rights Act, which provides for the establishment of the NHRC to look into complaints of human rights violations suffered by people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/CHRI-RTIusersattacks-IPTsubmission-Dec13-Delhi-VNayak.pdf">click here</a> to download the CHRI's submission relating to Attacks on Users and Activists of the Right to Information in India and Role of the National Human Rights Commission.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Also, <a href="tinymce/uploaded/RTI-ListofAttacks-Nov13_1.xls" title="RTI List of attacks">click here</a> to access the List of RTI Activists and Users Murdered / Attacked / Harassed in India.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Crime in India 2012[/inside] published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a>:<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Women</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of crimes committed against women increased from 2,28,650 in 2011 to 2,44,270 in 2012.<br /> <br /> • West Bengal reported 12.7% of total such cases in the country (30,942 out of 2,44,270). Assam reported the highest crime rate (89.5) as compared to the National average rate of 41.7.<br /> <br /> • The proportion of IPC crimes committed against women under total IPC crimes has increased during last 5 years from 8.9% in the year 2008 to 9.4% during the year 2012.<br /> <br /> • Madhya Pradesh has reported the highest number of Rape cases (3,425), Assault on Women with intent to outrage her modesty (6,655) and Importation of Girls from foreign country (59) accounting for 13.7%, 14.6% and 10.1% respectively of total such cases reported in the country.<br /> <br /> • Andhra Pradesh has reported 40.5% (3,714) of Insult to the modesty of Women cases.<br /> <br /> • Highest cases of Kidnapping & Abduction 20.7% (7,910) and Dowry Deaths 27.3% (2,244) were reported in Uttar Pradesh.<br /> <br /> • Offenders were known to the victims in 98.2% of Rape cases (24,470 out of 24,915).<br /> <br /> • A total of 36,622 cases of crime against women were reported from 53 mega cities out of 2,44,270 cases reported in the country during 2012. The rate of crime in these cities at 47.76 was comparatively higher as compared to national rate at 41.74<br /> <br /> • Among 53 mega cities, Delhi (City) accounted for 14.2% (5,194) of such crimes followed by Bengaluru 6.2% (2,263) and Kolkata 5.7% (2,073).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Children</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of crimes committed against children increased from 33,098 in 2011 to 38,172 in 2012<br /> <br /> • An increase of 15.3% was reported in incidence of crime against children in 2012 over 2011.<br /> <br /> • Percentage distribution of crime against children w.r.t. all India figures for the year 2012 was Uttar Pradesh (15.8%), Madhya Pradesh (13.5%), Delhi (11.7%), Maharashtra (9.5%), Bihar (7.6%), Andhra Pradesh (5.9%), Chhattisgarh (4.9%), Rajasthan (4.7%), West Bengal (4.4%) and Gujarat (3.5%).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Human Trafficking</em></strong><br /> <br /> • An increase of 1.1% in human trafficking incidence was observed (3,554 cases in 2012 as compared to 3,517 in 2011).<br /> <br /> • 44.4% of decrease of cases of ‘Buying of Girls for Prostitution’ was reported during 2012 over 2011.<br /> <br /> • Cases under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act increased by 5.2% (from 2,435 in 2011 to 2,563 in 2012). Tamil Nadu (500 cases) followed by Andhra Pradesh (472 cases) reported the highest incidence of 19.5% and 18.4% respectively of total cases (2,563) under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes</em></strong><br /> <br /> • Uttar Pradesh reported 18.4% of total crimes against Scheduled Castes (6,202 out of 33,655) and Rajasthan reported 22.8% of total (1,351 out of 5,922) crimes against Scheduled Tribes in the country during the year 2012.<br /> <br /> • Rajasthan reported the highest rate of crime (45.5) against Scheduled Castes as compared to the National average of 16.7. Kerala reported the highest rate of crime against Scheduled Tribes (25.6) as compared to the National average of 5.7.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Police and Human Rights</em></strong><br /> <br /> • 57,363 complaints were reported against police personnel during the year 2012, out of which 2,289 cases were registered and 42 police personnel were convicted.<br /> <br /> • 205 cases of Human Rights Violation by Police were reported during 2012 out of which 19 were charge-sheeted. The highest number of Human Rights Violation by Police was reported in Assam (102 cases)<br /> <br /> • 109 Custodial Deaths were reported in the country. 7 policemen were charge sheeted and no policeman was convicted during the year. 1 case of Custodial Rape was reported in the country. 24 cases of custodial deaths were on account of suicide<br /> <br /> • Total number of police firing was reported on 548 occasions during 2012.<br /> <br /> • Maximum casualties of civilians were observed in unspecified (other) events (31) and maximum casualties of policemen were observed in Anti Extremists & Terrorist Operations (37).<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Crime in India 2011[/inside] published by the National Crime Records Bureau, <a href="http://ncrb.gov.in/">http://ncrb.gov.in/</a>:<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Women</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against women stood at 2,28,650 in 2011 while the same stood at 2,13,585 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • West Bengal reported 12.7% of total such cases in the country (29,133 out of 2,28,650). Tripura reported the highest crime rate (37.0) as compared to the National average rate of 18.9.<br /> <br /> • The proportion of IPC crimes committed against women towards total IPC crimes has increased during last 5 years from 8.8% in the year 2007 to 9.4% during the year 2011.<br /> <br /> • Madhya Pradesh has reported the highest number of Rape cases (3,406), Molestation (6,665) and Importation of Girls (45) accounting for 14.1%, 15.5% and 56.3% respectively of total such cases reported in the country.<br /> <br /> • Andhra Pradesh has reported 42.7% (3,658) of Sexual Harassment cases.<br /> <br /> • Highest cases of Kidnapping & Abduction 21.2% (7,525) and Dowry Deaths 26.9% (2,322) were reported in Uttar Pradesh.<br /> <br /> • A total of 33,789 cases of crime against women were reported from 53 mega cities out of 2,28,650 cases reported in the country during 2011.<br /> <br /> • Among 53 cities, Delhi (City) accounted for 13.3% (4,489) of total crimes against women followed by Bengaluru-5.6% (1,890) and Hyderabad-5.5% (1,860).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Children</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against children stood at 33098 in 2011 while the same stood at 26694 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • An increase of 24.0% was reported in incidence of crime against Children in 2011 over 2010.<br /> <br /> • Percentage distribution of crime against children w.r.t. all India figures for the year 2011 was Uttar Pradesh (16.6%), Madhya Pradesh (13.2%), Delhi (12.8%), Maharashtra (10.2%), Bihar & Andhra Pradesh (6.7% each), Chhattisgarh (5.4%), Rajasthan (4.5%), West Bengal (4.4%) and Gujarat (3.4%).<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Human Trafficking</em></strong><br /> <br /> • 2.8% increase in human trafficking incidence was observed in 3,517 cases in 2011 as compared to 3,422 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • 122.2% of increase of cases of ‘Importation of Girls’ was reported during 2011 over 2010.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes</em></strong><br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against SCs stood at 33719 in 2011 while the same stood at 32712 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • The total number of incidents of crime against STs stood at 5756 in 2011 while the same stood at 5885 in 2010.<br /> <br /> • Uttar Pradesh reported 22.8% of total crimes against Scheduled Castes (7,702 out of 33,719) and Madhya Pradesh reported 22.3% of total (1,284 out of 5,756) crimes against Scheduled Tribes in the country during the year 2011.<br /> <br /> • Rajasthan reported the highest rate of crime (7.6) against Scheduled Castes as compared to the National average of 2.8. Arunachal Pradesh reported the highest rate of crime against Scheduled Tribes (2.5) as compared to the National average of 0.5.<br /> <br /> <strong><em>Police and Human Rights</em></strong><br /> <br /> • 61,765 complaints were reported against police personnel during the year 2011, out of which 11,171 cases were registered and 47 police personnel were convicted.<br /> <br /> • 72 cases of Human Right Violation by Police were reported during 2011 out of which 46 were charge-sheeted. The highest number of Human Right Violation by Police was reported in Delhi (50 cases)<br /> <br /> • 104 Custodial Deaths were reported in the country. 14 policemen were charge sheeted and no policeman was convicted during the year. 1 case of Custodial Rape was reported in the country. 33 cases of custodial deaths were reported by suicide.<br /> <br /> • Total number of police firing was reported in 482 occasions during 2011.<br /> <br /> • Maximum casualties of civilians were observed in unspecified (other) events (40) and maximum casualties of policemen were observed in Anti Extremists & Terrorist Operation (55).</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the report titled [inside]Torture in India 2011[/inside], which has been brought out by Asian Centre for Human Rights, <a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2011.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In the last three years, 2,044 cases of police torture were registered to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). These included 574 cases in 2008-2009, 615 cases in 2009-2010 and 855 cases in 2010-2011. The statistics has gone up every year. However, these cases are only a fraction. Majority of the cases go unreported. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• From 2001 to 2010, the NHRC recorded 14,231 deaths in police and judicial custody in India. This includes 1,504 deaths in police custody and 12,727 deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC recorded 1504 deaths in police custody during 2001-2010 which includes 165 deaths in 2001-2002; 183 deaths in 2002-2003; 162 deaths in 2003-2004; 136 deaths in 2004-2005; 139 deaths in 2005-2006; 119 deaths in 2006-2007; 187 deaths in 2007-2008; 142 deaths in 2008-2009; 124 deaths in 2009-2010 and 147 deaths in 2010-2011.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Maharashtra recorded the highest number of deaths in police custody with 250 deaths during 2001-2010; followed by Uttar Pradesh (174); Gujarat (134); Andhra Pradesh (109); West Bengal (98); Tamil nadu (95); Assam (84); Karnataka (67); Punjab (57); Madhya Pradesh (55); Haryana (45); Bihar (44); Kerala (42); Jharkhand (41); Rajasthan (38); Orissa (34); Delhi (30); Chhattisgarh (24); Uttarakhand (20); Meghalaya (17); Arunachal Pradesh (10); Tripura (8); Jammu and Kashmir (6); Himachal Pradesh (5); Goa, Chandigarh and Pondicherry (3 each); Manipur, Mizoram and nagaland (2 each); and sikkim and Dadra and Nagar Haveli (1 each).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• During 2010-2011, the highest number of death in police custody was reported from Maharashtra with 31 cases followed by Uttar Pradesh (15); Andhra Pradesh (14); Gujarat (9); Assam and Orissa (7 each); Bihar, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Jharkhand (6 each); Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal (5 each); Uttarakhand (4); Delhi and Haryana (3 each); Goa, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Manipur, Mizoram and Rajasthan (2 each); and Nagaland, Tripura and Chhattisgarh (1 each).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC also recorded 12,727 deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-10. These included 1,140 cases in 2001-2002; 1,157 cases in 2002-2003; 1,300 cases in 2003-2004; 1,357 cases in 2004-2005; 1,591 cases in 2005-2006; 1,477 cases in 2006-2007; 1,789 cases in 2007-2008; 1,532 cases in 2008-2009; 1,389 cases in 2009-2010 upto 28 February 2010. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Uttar Pradesh recorded the highest number of deaths in judicial custody from 2001-2002 to 2009-10 with 2171 deaths, followed by Bihar (1512); Maharashtra (1176); Andhra Pradesh (1037); Tamil Nadu (744); Punjab (739); West Bengal (601); Jharkhand (541); Madhya Pradesh (520); Karnataka (496); Rajasthan (491); Gujarat (458); Haryana (431); Orissa (416); Kerala (402); Chhattisgarh (351); Delhi (224); Assam (165); Uttarakhand (91); Himachal Pradesh (29); Tripura (26); Meghalaya (24); Chandigarh (23); Goa (18); Arunachal Pradesh (9); Pondicherry (8); Jammu and Kashmir and Nagaland (6 each); Mizoram (4); sikkim and Andaman and Nicober Island (3 each); and Manipur and Dadra and Nagar Haveli (1 each).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• On 9 March 2010, Mr Ajay Maken, then Minister of state in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India stated in the Lok Sabha that the NHRC recommended monetary relief of Rs 5,59,45,000 to the next of kin of the deceased in 386 cases of custodial death/rape across the country from 1 April 2006 to 28 February 2010. These included Rs. 1,62,5000 in 19 cases in 2006-2007; Rs. 1,16,75,000 in 82 cases in 2007-2008; Rs. 2,05,75,000 in 144 cases in 2008-2009; and Rs. 2,20,70,000 in 141 cases in 2009-2010 up to 28 February 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC registered only a total of the 25 cases of death in the custody of the military/ para-military forces from 2001-2002 to 2009-2010 up to 28 February 2010. These included 2 cases in 2001-02; nil cases in 2002-2003; 1 case in 2003-2004; 7 in 2004-2005; 4 in 2005-2006; 1 case in 2006-2007; 4 cases in 2007-2008; 4 cases in 2008-2009; and 2 cases in 2009-2010 upto 28 February 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the report titled: [inside]Second Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the Country by NHRC (2011)[/inside], <a href="http://www.nhrc.nic.in/Reports/UPR-Final%20Report.pdf">http://www.nhrc.nic.in/Reports/UPR-Final%20Report.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Civil and political rights</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 35% of the complaints to the NHRC annually are against the police. In 2006 the Supreme Court issued seven binding directives to start reform, but little has been done, though the need is urgent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 9% of the complaints to the NHRC in 2010-11 were on inaction by officials or their abuse of power, confirming that laws are often not implemented or ignored.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Custodial justice remained a problem. Jails are overcrowded and unhygienic, disease rampant and treatment poor. 67% of prisoners are under trial, either unable to raise bail or confined far longer than they should be because of the huge backlog of cases.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There are inordinate delays in the provision of justice. 56,383 cases were pending in the Supreme Court at the end of October 2011. At the end of 2010, 4.2 million cases were pending in High Courts, and almost 28 million in subordinate courts.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The degrading practice of manual scavenging festers on. Some States are in denial over this. The Indian Railways are the largest users of manual scavengers.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Economic, social and cultural rights</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• A massive public distribution system has not assured the right to food because malnutrition is endemic. The National Advisory Council has recommended that legal entitlements to subsidized foodgrains be extended to at least 75% of the population. This is not acceptable to the Government, which sets arbitrary ceilings on the numbers who can be declared as being below the poverty line.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The official estimate that 27.5% of the population was below the poverty line in 2004-05 grossly understates the incidence of poverty. The expert committee set up by the Planning Commission put the figure at 37.2%. Other committees set up by Ministries peg it even higher.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Over 90% of the workforce is in the unorganized sector, has no access to social security, is particularly vulnerable in the cities, and is therefore driven into permanent debt, often leading to conditions of bonded labour.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme guaranteed 100 days of work a year to any rural household that needed it. Government data showed that 56 million households applied, 55 million were given work but on average received half the wages guaranteed. The Scheme has not therefore made enough of an impact, very large sums of money have been siphoned off, and it does not provide long-term employment or build permanent assets.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Public spending on health continues to be abysmally low, at about 1% of GDP, despite Government's commitment to raise it to 2-3%. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The current National Family Health Survey reports that "the percentage of children under age five years who are underweight is almost 20 times as high in India as would be expected in a healthy, well-nourished population and is almost twice as high as the average percentage of underweight children in sub-Saharan African countries.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• A huge programme called the Integrated Child Development Services was set up in 1975, but an evaluation done in 2011 for the Planning Commission found that 60% of the annual budget for supplementary nutrition was being diverted. (A study done for the NHRC confirms this.)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The Indira Awas Yojana, set up to provide rural housing, requires that an applicant have a plot of land. Millions of landless are excluded. The scheme does not give enough to build a house, and there is some evidence that those who take the money end up in debt. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The NHRC, which monitors human rights in 28 representative districts across India, finds in its field visits that none of the flagship programmes function well.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>The Naxal movement</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Estimates are that 200 out of the 600 districts in India are affected, though the Government puts the figure at around 60 districts.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Torture in India (2010)[/inside], which has been prepared by the Asian Centre for Human Rights, </span><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2010.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2010.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Since 2000, according to the statistics submitted to the parliament by the Ministry of Home Affairs, prison custody deaths have increased by 54.02% by 2008, while police custody deaths during the same period have increased by 19.88%. In fact, under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) rule from 2004-2005 to 2007-2008, prison custody deaths have increased by 70.72% while police custody deaths during the same period have increased by 12.60%.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• On 8 April 2010, the Cabinet approved the decision to introduce the Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 before the parliament and ratify the UN Convention Against Torture. The Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010 is being treated as a secret document. Its earlier draft, Prevention of Torture Bill, 2008, contained only three operative paragraphs relating to (1) definition of torture, (2) punishment for torture, and (3) limitations for cognizance of offences. The Prevention of Torture Bill, 2008 was highly flawed and ACHR had submitted specific recommendations to the Government of India after holding a National Conference in New Delhi in June 2009.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In the decade 1999-2009, the Congress-National Congress Party ruled Maharashtra had the highest number of deaths (246 cases) in police custody followed by Uttar Pradesh (165 cases), Gujarat (139 cases), West Bengal (112 cases), Andhra Pradesh (99 cases), Tamil Nadu (93 cases), Assam (91 cases), Punjab (71 cases), Karnataka (69 cases), Madhya Pradesh (66 cases), Haryana (45 cases), Bihar (43 cases), Delhi (42 cases), Kerala (41 cases), Rajasthan (38 cases), Jharkhand (31 cases), Orissa (27 cases), Chhattisgarh (23 cases), Meghalaya (17 cases), Uttarakhand (16 cases), Arunachal Pradesh (15 cases), Tripura (9 cases), Goa (5 cases), Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Chandigarh (4 cases each), Pondicherry (3 cases) and Mizoram, Sikkim, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, and Andaman & Nicober Islands (1 each).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Of the 127 police cusody deaths registered by the NHRC in 2008-2009, the highest number of cases were reported from Uttar Pradesh (24 cases) followed by Maharashtra (23), Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat (12 cases each), Assam (7 cases), Tamil Nadu and Haryana (6 cases each), Bihar and Madhya Pradesh (5 cases each), Punjab, Rajasthan & West Bengal (4 cases each), Jharkhand, Karnataka, Arunachal Pradesh, Orissa and Kerala (2 cases each), and 1 case reported from Meghalaya, Tripura, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh and Dadar & Nagar Haveli.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The police routinely cite “suicide” as a cause of death in custody. According to the NCRB, 31 persons died by committing suicide in police custody in 2007, 24 persons in 2006 and 30 persons in 2005.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), one custodial rape case was reported in India in 2007, two custodial rape cases were reported in 2006, and seven custodial rape cases in 2005.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Among all the armed opposition groups in India, the Naxalites or Maoists are probably the worst human rights violators. In blatant disregard for the international humanitarian law, the Maoists continued to kill civilians on the allegation of being “police informers”, members of the anti-Maoist civilian militia such as “Salwa Judum” and for not obeying their diktats. The Maoists have been responsible for brutal killing of their hostages after abduction. Often the hostages are killed by slitting their throats or beheading. Often these killings were authorized by Maoist ‘people’s courts or Jan Adalats.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The National Human Rights Commission registered 1,996 cases of torture of prisoners in 2006-2007, 2,481 cases in 2007-2008 and 1,596 cases in 2008-2009 (upto 11 December 2008).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) under Ministry of Home Affairs, 1,424 prisoners died in 2006, 1,387 prisoners in 2005, 1,169 prisoners in 2004, and 1,060 prisoners in 2003 in India. Of the 1,423 prisoners who died in 2006, 80 died as a result of “unnatural” causes.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The 2007 Annual Report of the National Crime Records Bureau reported a total of 30,031 cases - including 206 cases under the Protection of Civil Rights Act and 9,819 cases under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989 – against the Scheduled Castes in 2007. Although the average charge-sheeting rate for the crimes against the SCs was 90.6 per cent, the average conviction rate was only 30.9%. A total of 51,705 persons (78.9%) out of 65,554 persons arrested for crimes committed against Scheduled Castes were charge-sheeted but only 29.4% were convicted consisting of 13,871 persons out of 47,136 persons against whom trials were completed. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The NHRC on a number of occasions has failed to recognize torture despite medical evidence supporting allegations of torture. While considering the cases, the NHRC overly relies on official records (often reports of the security establishment) that it often ignores contrary evidence including medical records.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]Prison Statistics 2006[/inside], National Crime Records Bureau<br /> (</span><a href="http://ncrb.nic.in/PSI2006/prison2006.htm"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://ncrb.nic.in/PSI2006/prison2006.htm</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">): </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> A total of 1,423 prisoners died in jails due to natural and unnatural causes during 2006 in the country out of which 1,343 were natural deaths and 80 were due to unnatural causes</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Deaths due to murder by inmates were reported only from Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh and Karnataka (1 each).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Uttar Pradesh (3,101) has reported the highest number of inmates detained for a period of 2 to 3 years followed by Bihar (2,565). Meghalaya has reported the highest percentage (9.6%) undertrial prisoners kept in custody for 2 to 3 years followed by Nagaland (7.7%), Jharkhand (7.2%) and Uttaranchal (7.1%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Uttar Pradesh has reported the highest (8,886) number of undertrial prisoners detained for a period of 6 months to 1 year followed by Bihar (8,076).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 1,569 undertrials were reported languishing in jails for 5 years or more in different parts of the country.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The percentage of undertrial prisoners to the total prisoners in jails is 65.7 percent in the country and the share of convicted prisoners is 31.3 percent</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The highest percentage (28.0%) of undertrials were charged with Murder. Uttar Pradesh reported the highest number of (9,936) such Undertrials (18.5%) followed by Bihar 8,102 (15.1%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 1,569 Undertrials (0.6% of total undertrials) were detained in jails for more than 5 years at the end of the year 2006. Punjab had the highest number of such undertrials (377) followed by Bihar (356).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 347 Convicts including 8 females lodged in different jails of the country at the end of 2006 were awarded capital punishment.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 62,180 Convicts accounting for 53.3% of total Convicts in the country were undergoing sentences for Life Imprisonment at the end of the year 2006.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 13,084 Convicts were repeat/recidivists, which accounted for 5.1% of total convicts admitted during the year.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 64 convicted prisoners were in the age group of 16-18 years, 44,371 in the age group of 18 to 30 years, 56,479 convicts were in the age group of 30 to 50 years and 15,761 convicts were 50 years or more.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> 567 undertrial prisoners were in the age group of 16-18 years, 1,06,335 in the age group of above 18 to 30 years, 1,09,039 undertrials were in the age group of above 30 to 50 years and 29,303 undertrials were 50 years or more.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>According to the Annual Report 2004-05, National Human Rights Commission,<br /> (</em></span><a href="http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/AR/AR04-05ENG.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/AR/AR04-05ENG.pdf</em></span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>): </em></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><strong>Custodial deaths</strong></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In keeping with the guidelines issued by the Commission, the State Government Authorities have been reporting all deaths in custody, police as well as judicial, natural or otherwise, to the Commission. In the year 2004-2005, out of 1493 custodial deaths reported to the Commission, 136 deaths in police custody and 1,357 deaths in judicial custody. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> There was, however, an increase in the deaths in police custody in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Orissa, Delhi, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In the light of the revised guidelines issued by the Commission on 2 December, 2003, 122 intimations were received from the various State Governments about killings in encounters during the year 2004-2005. These included 66 such intimations from the State of Uttar Pradesh, 18 intimations from Andhra Pradesh, 9 from Delhi and 5 each from Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Separately, the Commission also received 84 complaints about alleged killings in fake encounters.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><strong>Population of prisoners</strong></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The total prison population was 3,36,151, which indicated an overcrowding of 41.47% against the authorised capacity of 2,37,617. 11 States/ UTs, namely, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Sikkim, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, and Delhi experienced overcrowding ranging from 52% to 224%. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Delhi continues to hold the most overcrowded jails (224%) followed by Jharkhand (195%) Chhattisgarh (111%) and Gujarat (104%). Jails had idle capacities in 6 States and 4 Union Territories, namely Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur, Nagaland, Rajasthan, Uttaranchal, West Bengal, Chandigarh, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Lakshdeep</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Undertrial prisoners constituted 71.14% of the total prison population in the country. 11 States/UTs have undertrial prisoners exceeding 80% of the total prison population. These are: Dadra & Nagar Haveli (100%), Meghalaya (94.71%), Manipur (92.51%), Jammu & Kashmir (88.90%), Bihar (85.66%), Daman & Diu (84.15%), Nagaland (83.31%), Uttar Pradesh (82.47%), Delhi (81.45%), Chandigarh (80.42%) and West Bengal (80.20%). Chhattisgarh is the only State, which has less than 50% undertrial prisoners (48.57%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Women constituted 3.97% of the total prison population in the country. Uttaranchal (11.69%) tops the list followed by Mizoram (10.45%), Tamil Nadu (9.25%), Chandigarh (6.47%), Andhra Pradesh (5.77%), West Bengal (5.71%) and Punjab (5.68%).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> A total of 1544 children were in jails with their mothers. U.P. with 385 accounted for the largest, followed by West Bengal (163), Maharashtra (143), Jharkhand (142) and Madhya Pradesh (127).</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><strong>Human rights abuse</strong></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> The total number of cases registered in the Commission during 2004-2005 was 74,401, while the corresponding figure for the year 2003-2004 was 72,990. Of the cases that were registered during the year under review, 72,775 cases were complaints of alleged human rights violations besides 1500 cases related to intimations of custodial deaths, 4 cases of custodial rapes and 122 related to police encounters.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> Of the custodial deaths that were reported in the course of the year 2004-2005, 7 deaths allegedly occurred in the custody of defence / para-military forces, 136 deaths occurred in police custody, while 1357 in judicial custody.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> As in the past, the largest number of complaints registered was from the State of Uttar Pradesh; they numbered 44,351 or 59.6 percent of the total number of complaints registered by the Commission. Delhi followed Uttar Pradesh, with 5,221 complaints while Bihar coming third with 3,917 complaints.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Torture in India 2008-A State of Denial[/inside], which has been brought out by the Asian Centre for Human Rights (</span><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2008.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/torture2008.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">): </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> There exist serious weaknesses in institutions that should check torture in India. The Courts have proven a powerful tool against torture but are hampered by lack of specific legislation, immunities offered under the Criminal Procedure Code and national security laws as well as the more general problem of judicial delay.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2006-2007, the NHRC received a total of 1,597 custodial death cases including 118 cases in police custody, 1,477 cases in judicial custody and two cases in the custody of defense and paramilitary forces.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2005-2006, the NHRC received 1,575 custodial deaths including 124 in police custody and 1,451 in judicial custody. In 2004-2005, NHRC received 1,493 cases of custodial deaths including 136 deaths in police custody and 1, 357 deaths in judicial custody. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2003-2004, there were 1,340 custodial death cases including 183 in police custody and 1,157 in judicial custody. In 2002-2003, NHRC received 1,463 custodial death cases including 162 deaths in police custody and 1,300 deaths in judicial custody, one death in the custody of para-military forces. The statistics of NHRC imply that in the last five years 7,468 persons at an average of 1,494 persons per year or four person in a day died in police and prison custody in India. However, these figures represent only a fraction of the actual cases of torture. Cases of torture not resulting in death are not recorded. They do not differentiate between deaths in custody resulting from legitimate causes, for example old age, and due to the use of torture. Moreover, the NHRC has no mandate to investigate or record human rights violations perpetrated by military and para-military forces. NHRC often reports that there were no custodial deaths resulting from torture in the conflict-afflicted state of Manipur or in Jammu and Kashmir. This assertion lies uneasily with the high levels of well-documented cases in those states.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> A large number of reported cases of torture and custodial death result from attempts to extract a confession relating to theft or other petty offences. Clearly this suggests that the suspects belonging to the lower economic and social strata are particularly vulnerable.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to [inside]India Human Rights Report, 2008[/inside], which has been brought out by the Asian Centre for Human Rights (</span><a href="http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/AR08/AR2008.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/AR08/AR2008.pdf</span></a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">):</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2007, 29,596 cases on alienation and restoration of tribal lands were heard by the courts in Madhya Pradesh. Not a single case was ruled in favour of the tribal groups.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> “Encounter killing” is yet another euphemism used to hide extrajudicial executions. It presupposes an armed encounter. The fact that out of 301 complaints of “encounter deaths” between 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2007, over 66% (201 cases) were received by NHRC from Uttar Pradesh alone – which has no armed conflict - is extremely disturbing.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> In 2007 the NCRB reported that 139 people died in police custody. 23 people died during production, process of the courts and the journey connected with investigation; 38 of them died during their hospitalization and treatment; 9 died in mob attacks/riots; 2 were killed by other criminals; 31 committed suicide; 7 escaped and 29 died from illness/ natural causes.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => 'Rural Expert', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 13, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'human-rights-56', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 1, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 56, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $imgtag = false $imgURL = '#' $titleText = null $descText = 'KEY TRENDS • The total number of civilians killed and injured during police firing in 2016 was 92 and 351, respectively. The total number of civilians killed and injured during police lathi-charge in 2016 was 35 and 759, respectively #$ • In 2015, the NCRB recorded over 73 lakh complaints of cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to investigate, such...' $foundposition = false $startp = (int) 0 $endp = (int) 200preg_replace - [internal], line ?? include - APP/Template/SearchResult/index.ctp, line 35 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 880 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
