By Dr. K. Shivaram
Ajay R. Singh
Advocates
fiogf49gjkf0d
[Bihar Human Rights Commission (www.itatonline .com)] The applicant Rajendra Singh has approached the Commission complaining of violation of his human rights in course of the search and seizure operations conducted by officials of the Income-tax Department in his residential premises from 8-9-2010 to 10-9-2010. The grievance of the applicant is that he belongs to the minority Sikh community. He is earning his livelihood by doing timber business in the name and style of M/s. Bhargo Saw Mill at Mithapur in the town of Patna. On 8-9-2010 the authorities of the Income-tax Department came to his house and closed the main gate which is the only point of ingress and egress. They took the mobile phones of the applicant and others and did not allow them to contact any person outside during the course of the raid. They did not allow them to cook the food. They misbehaved and abused members of the family including the female inmates. They smoked with impunity; they also threw cigarette butts and empty packets of cigarettes on the images of Sikh Gurus and the Golden Temple, which hurt their religious feelings. They did not even allow them to go to the toilet. The applicant sent for his lawyer and he was made to leave the place. They also in the course of the raid held out threats of punitive action.
Notice was issued to the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Bihar who referred it to the Director General of Income-tax (Inv.) as the search and seizure operations were conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Department.
The Commission observed that it was the admitted position that the search and seizure operations commenced at 9.30 a.m. on 8-9-2010 and concluded at 9.20 p.m. on 10-9-2010. The grievance of the applicant was that he was continuously interrogated during this period for more than 30 hours. The operations having admittedly commenced at 9.30 a.m. on 8-9-2010 it was clear that question was being asked at about 10 p.m. on 9-9-2010.
The fact that question no. 15 was asked at about 10 p.m. or question no. 31 was asked at 3.30 a.m. on 10-9-2010 cannot be the basis to conclude that the interrogation took place for a few hours. The statement u/s. 132 of the Income-tax Act was the result of sustained interrogation which in the instant case apparently commenced from the morning of 9-9-2010. And even if anyone were to visualise the sequence of events liberally in favour of the Income-tax Department, there was no basis for taking the view that the interrogation/recording of statement was with breaks/intervals.
The Commission was of the view that the members of the raiding party may take their own time to conclude the search and seizure operations but such operations must be carried out keeping in view the basic human rights of the individual. They have no right to cause physical and mental torture to him. If the officer-in-charge of the interrogation/recording of statements wanted to continue with the process he should have stopped the same at the proper time and resumed it next morning. But continuing the process without any break or interval at odd hours up to 3.30 a.m., forcing the applicant and/ or his family members to remain awake when it was time to sleep was a torturous act which cannot be countenanced in a civilised society. It was violative of their rights relating to dignity of the individual and therefore violative of human rights. Even diehard criminal offenders have certain human rights which cannot be taken away. The applicant’s position was not worse than that.
In the opinion of the Commission, the Income-tax Department should ensure that the search and seizure operations at large in future are carried out without violating one’s basic human rights.
The Commission was prima facie satisfied that there had been violation of the applicant’s human rights by the concerned officials of the Incometax Department while continuing the search and seizure operations for which he was entitled to be monetarily compensated.
