Acting suo motu, the commission has issued notices to the chief secretary and the director general of police, Uttar Pradesh calling for a detailed report on the matter within four weeks.
—
THE National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued notice to the government of Uttar Pradesh over the beating of a student by his classmates in Muzaffarnagar.
The Muslim student was beaten at the behest of a teacher purportedly referring to his faith, in an apparent case of hate speech.
A video of the incident went viral on August 25, leading to calls for action against the teacher and the school.
The commission states that if the contents of the media reports are true, the incident amounted to a violation of the victim’s human rights.
Acting suo motu, the commission has issued notices to the chief secretary and the director general of police, Uttar Pradesh calling for a detailed report on the matter within four weeks.
The report should include information “on the action taken against the teacher, the status of the FIR registered in the matter and compensation, if any, paid to the aggrieved family, as well as steps taken or proposed to be taken to ensure that such shameful incidents do not recur in the future,” the NHRC says.
A day before the NHRC took suo motu cognisance of the incident, the Uttar Pradesh police registered a first information report (FIR) against Mohammad Zubair, co-founder of Alt News for allegedly disclosing the identity of the victim.
The FIR was registered under Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which prohibits the disclosure of identity of children in conflict with law, or who are victims or witnesses.
The Section reads: “No report in any newspaper, magazine, news-sheet or audio-visual media or other forms of communication regarding any inquiry or investigation or judicial procedure, shall disclose the name, address or school or any other particular, which may lead to the identification of a child in conflict with law or a child in need of care and protection or a child victim or witness of a crime, involved in such matter, under any other law for the time being in force, nor shall the picture of any such child be published.”
The proviso to Section 74 carves out an exception to the effect that for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Juvenile Justice Board or Child Welfare Committee holding the inquiry may permit such disclosure, if in its opinion such disclosure is in the best interest of the child.
The Section entails imprisonment for a term which may extend up to six months or a fine which may extend to two lakh rupees or both.
