Panchkula: The Haryana Human Rights Commission on Thursday initiated the process of considering compensation for an 18-year-old boy who was allegedly re-arrested under other sections in a celebratory firing case in Pinjore despite having secured bail earlier. The court had subsequently declared his arrest illegal and recorded visible injuries on his body, lending weight to allegations of custodial torture.In its order, the commission observed that the violation of complainant Parvesh Sharma’s human rights by police officials stood substantiated by judicial observations, departmental inquiry findings and admissions made by the state authorities.The commission noted that the sub-divisional judicial magistrate, Kalka, had declared Sharma’s arrest illegal in an order dated July 16, 2025, while also observing that the allegations of custodial torture were serious. In a subsequent order dated July 18, the court specifically recorded visible injuries on his body.The commission had earlier directed the Director General of Police (DGP), Haryana, to order an inquiry by an officer not below the rank of an IPS officer into allegations against inspector Jagdish Chander, now retired, and sub-inspector Yadwinder Singh. The inquiry, conducted by the additional superintendent of police, Yamunanagar, held both police officials guilty of the charges. The DGP also acknowledged the findings and awarded punishment to the officials, the order stated.The Commission observed that while the Haryana govt had framed a policy for compensation in cases of deaths in police custody, there was no comprehensive policy covering victims who survive custodial torture, physical assault or other human rights violations. It said the absence of such a policy did not restrict its statutory powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which empowers it to recommend compensation where a violation of human rights by a public servant is established.The state govt informed the commission that a broader proposal for compensation in cases of custodial human rights violations involving surviving victims had not been approved by the council of ministers, which had cleared compensation only in cases of custodial deaths.Taking note of the circumstances, the commission placed the matter before its chairperson (Single Bench-I) for consideration and appropriate directions regarding the constitution of a larger bench to consider recommending suitable monetary compensation to Sharma. Victim’s counsel Deepanshu Bansal said the matter had now been adjourned to Nov 25.The case emerged after a video surfaced on social media showing the second accused, 18-year-old Parvesh Sharma, allegedly firing a weapon in celebration of a panchayat election victory on the night of June 16–17, 2025.He was initially booked under Section 288 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Section 25(9) of the Arms Act, 1959. Parvesh Sharma was later granted bail. During the investigation, his co-accused, Neeraj, was arrested, and a .12-bore country-made katta was allegedly recovered at his instance. Parvesh was also re-arrested. A subsequent medical report recorded four injuries on his body.Additional sections were subsequently added to the case. However, during proceedings on July 18, the court observed multiple irregularities in the investigation process.
