Nanak Chand Vs. DCP (West District), Delhi Police | Case No. 4/1439/2016-Wel./CD/3482-84 | Dated: 22.12.2017

In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

National Capital Territory of Delhi

25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2

Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in

[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

Case No. 4/1439/2016-Wel./CD/3482-84                          Dated: 22.12.2017

In the matter of:

Sh. Nanak Chand,

D-10, Raghubir Nagar,

New Delhi-110027.                                                 ................ Petitioner

                                      Versus               

The DCP (West District),

Office of the Dy. Commissioner of Police,

Delhi Police, Police Station, Rajouri Garden,

New Delhi-110028.                                           ………...…Respondent

                         ORDER

          The above named complainant, a person with blindness vide his complaint received on 07.10.2016 submitted that his uncles Ved Prakash, Raj Kumar and Pawan Kumar have threatened him to assassinate him.  He is the only son of his parents and his father is not fully sound in mind.  The house D-10, Raghubir Nagar, New Delhi in which he alongwith his parents is staying, was allotted to his father.  His father allowed his uncle Ved Prakash to live in one room on the 1^st floor.  But he is using D-10, 1^st Floor and D-11 for bathroom and kitchen.  His other uncles are residing in D-11 along with his grandmother.  D-11 is a parental property.  He further submitted that as he is a visually impaired person and socially weak, he fears that they will assassinate him.  His uncle Ved Prakash is not vacating the 1^st floor room.  They also often fight with him and his parents.  He filed a complaint with the Police Station, Khyala but no action was taken.  He requested to get the 1^st floor of his house vacated and to direct the Delhi Police to take legal action against his uncles.

2.      The complaint was taken up with the respondent vide communication dated 26.10.2016 followed by reminder dated 15.11.2016 and a hearing on 15.12.2016.  As the complainant did not appear on 15.12.2016, he was contacted on telephone and the report dated 30.11.2016 of the police was read over to him.  As he was not satisfied, another hearing was scheduled on 13.12.2017.

3.      During the hearing on 13.12.2017, the complainant accompanied by his mother reiterated his written submissions.   He added that his uncles, aunt and their children often harass and abuse them.  His father is suffering from neurological problems and often has seizures.  The neighbours are afraid of his uncles and therefore they also do not cooperate and come forward to help the complainant and his parents.

4.      He further submitted that he has filed a civil suit in Tis Hazari Court for vacating the house D-10, Raghubir Nagar, New Delhi.  He has filed another complaint u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the said relatives for harassment etc.  He also stated that by the time PCR van arrives, his uncles move away from the spot and escape action.

5.      The representative of the respondent submitted that the report in connection with this case has already been submitted vide communication dated 30.11.2016 after recording the statement of the complainant and approval of the competent authority as stated therein.Since the matter is related to the property dispute no further police action is required. However, the police will take appropriate action under the law if the complainant is harassed by the alleged person.  In any case, since a criminal case is also pending in the Tis Hazari Court on the similar allegations, the Police will file the status report and will act as may be directed by that Court.

6.      The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, has come into effect from 19.04.2017. Section 7 of the said Act mandates the appropriate Government to take measures to protect persons with disabilities from all forms of abuse, violence and exploitation.  Section 7(4) also provides that any Police Officer who receives a complaint or otherwise comes to know of abuse, violence or exploitation towards any person with disability, shall inform the aggrieved person of –

(a) his or her right to apply for protection under sub-section (2) and the particularsof the Executive Magistrate having jurisdiction to provide assistance;

(b) the particulars of the nearest organisation or institution working for therehabilitation of persons with disabilities;

(c) the right to free legal aid; and

(d) the right to file a complaint under the provisions of this Act or any other lawdealing with such offence:

7.      In this regard, Office of Commissioner of Police: Delhi has already issued an advisory circular No. 28/2017 dated 25.10.17 to all concerned in Delhi Police with the direction to all the DCsP to make the IOs aware of the provisions of the Act and to ensure its effective implementation.   A copy of the said circular was handed over to the representation of the respondent during the hearing.  The complainant was also informed about the legal aid that he can avail through Delhi Legal Services Authority.  He, in fact, is already aware about it and had availed the facility.

 

8.      In the light of the fact that the complainant has already moved the appropriate courts for legal remedies and the respondent assures to extend necessary assistance under the law as and when required by the complainant, the complaint is closed and disposed off accordingly.

9.      Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 22nd day of December, 2017.     

                                                                            

                                                                                       (T.D. Dhariyal )

                     State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

Mamta Ray Vs. DCP (North East District) Seelam Pur | Case No. 4/1469/2016-Wel/CD/1646-47 | Dated: 31.08.2017

Case Summary:

Mamta Ray vs. Deputy Police Commissioner (NE)

Atrocities: Complainant submitted that she and her husband were facing problems of unhygienic conditions in front of their house due to actions of their neighbors, and that said neighbors verbally abused her when she complained. No action has been taken by the police despite her report. During the course of the proceedings, the issue was settled, with the neighbor not abusing the complainant or her husband and having stopped with the aforementioned activities. The Respondent also noted that beat officers have been directed to keep a vigil and meet the complainant on a regular basis. However, complainant noted that the atmosphere of unfriendliness persisted between her and the neighbor.

The Court observed that minor issues between residents are blown out of proportion due to lack of sensitivity and dignity in the treatment of persons with disabilities., and it recognized the need to create more awareness about the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016. Respondent stated that the concerned staff of the police station has been advised on the matter, and that a meeting will be organized between the complainant and the neighbor.

Order / Judgement: 

In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities

National Capital Territory of Delhi

25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2

Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in

[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

Case No. 4/1469/2016-Wel/CD/1646-47                 Dated: 31.08.2017

In the matter of:

Sh. Mamta Ray,

H.No. 9, 20 Ft. Road, Kh. No. 174-175,

Gali No. 02, Near Subodh General Store,

Chauhan Patti, Sabahpur Extn.,

Delhi-110094.                                                           .……… Complainant     

                                                       Versus

The Deputy Police Commissioner,

North East District,

Seelam Pur,

New Delhi-110053.                                                     …...…Respondent

 

Date of hearing:    25.08.2017

Present                   Sh. Mamta Ray, Complainant.

Sh. Subhash Kumar Inspector &

S.A. Rasid, ACP on behalf of Respondent.

            

ORDER

The above named complainant, vide her complaint dated 20.06.2016 submitted that she and her husband both are persons with 60% locomotor disabilities, they  were facing  great difficulty due to creation of unhygienic conditions, water logging, stagnation of used water in front of her house by their neighbours mainly Smt. Prabha alias Neeru Sharma.  She further submitted that whenever she opposed such activities Smt. Prabha used filthy language against her and was making satire on her disability. She alleged that by doing so Smt. Prabha was trying to breach her fundamental right to life and personal liberty under article 21 of the Constitution. Although she reported the matter to the Police but the Police authorities had not shown sensitivity to resolve her problems.    She requested to resolve her grievance and protect her rights.

2.      The complaint was taken up with the respondent vide Notice dated 05.12.2016 followed by reminders dated 26.12.2016, 10.01.2017 and hearings on 17.03.2017 and 25.08.2017.   

3.           During the hearing, reiterating her written submissions, the complainant added that with her persistence with the concerned authorities and the community, her neighbour Smt. Prabha has stopped bullying and abusing her and her husband.  Smt. Prabha has also stopped throwing water in front of her house.  However, she is not prepared to speak to her and help in creating a congenial environment in the neighborhood.  She was forced to approach the police and this Court when the conduct of her neighbour became unbearable despite her best efforts.  The complainant further stated that she has worked in the child protection domain and is keen to create awareness and sensitize the community members rather than fighting with the people.

4.           The representative of the respondent submitted a report dated 23.08.2017, as per which, during the inquiry of the matter, the complainant informed that the issue had been settled and she did not want any police action and hence the complaint has been filed.  However, the Beat Officers of the Division have been directed to keep a vigil and meet her on regular basis. 

5.           It is observed that this Court has been receiving complaints from persons with disabilities pointing out that the community members particularly the neighbours do not attend accommodations and often do not treat them with sensitivity and dignity. Minor issues between residents / neighbours are blown out of proportion in most of the cases.  With a little sensitivity and by extending reasonable accommodations most of the issues could get addressed.  There is also a need to break the attitudinal barriers of the people who have little exposure to disability issues.

6.           In the light of the observations of this Court in this case and some other similar cases, there is a need to create awareness amongst the stakeholders and sensitize the members of the civil society, the Govt. functionaries and the law enforcement agencies about the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) and other disabilities specific legislations and safeguards available to them.

7.           Section 6 & 7 of the RPwD Act, 2016  also provide for protection of persons with disabilities from abuse, violence and exploitation and sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Act specifically provides that “any police officer who receives a complaint or otherwise comes to know of abuse, violence or exploitation towards any person with disability shall inform the aggrieved person of –

(a) His or her right to apply for protection under sub-section (2) and the particulars of the Executive Magistrate having jurisdiction to provide assistance;

(b) The particulars of the nearest organisation or institution working for the rehabilitation of persons with disabilities;

(c) The right to free legal  aid; and

(d) The right to file a complaint under the provisions of this Act or any other law dealing with such offence”.

8.           Sh. S.K. Rasid, Asstt. Commissioner of Police stated that the concerned staff of the Police Station has adequately been advised to ensure that the complainant and other persons with disabilities in the locality are handled with sensitivity and provided with assistance under the law.  A meeting with Smt. Prabha and the complainant will also be organized so as to create a better understanding between them.

9.           While the Office of the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities will plan and organize awareness generation activities in collaboration with the concerned agencies across the National Capital Territory of Delhi, action taken in this particular case by the respondent may be intimated to this Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Complainant.  The parties may also give to this Court, their suggestions if any, for creating awareness on disability issues in the community by email at comdis.delhi@nic.in by 15^th September, 2017.  

10.         The complaint is disposed of accordingly.

11.         Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 29^th day of August, 2017.

           (T.D. Dhariyal )

                      State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities