“It is uniform throughout the country that whenever we issue the first notice asking for the ATR (action taken report), generally to be filed within two or four weeks…it doesn’t happen in that time,” Justice V Ramasubramanian, Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), said on Thursday.The Commission chair was talking about the timelines for the disposal of cases before it and how they are impacted by adjournments caused by delays in government reports.The retired Supreme Court Justice was in Gujarat, along with NHRC Members Dr Justice Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi and Vijaya Bharathi Sayani, to hold open hearing on cases in the state, which was held on September 2-3 at the National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU) in the state capital.Speaking at a press conference in Gandhinagar, he said, “Then, the second time we issue a reminder. If the report is still not submitted, we then issue a notice under section 13(1) of the Protection of Human Rights Act for the personal attendance of the officer concerned before the Commission on a particular date. We also state that if we receive the report before that date, the appearance will stand dispensed with. Invariably, by that time, the reports are submitted.”Rs3.5 crore compensation awarded in 2 daysGiving a report on the work done by the NHRC in Gujarat, the Chairperson said, “On September 2, we sat in a full commission comprising myself and both members, Dr Justice Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi and Vijaya Bharathi Sayani. We took up about 45 cases and disposed of 27 of them. In 90% of the disposed cases, reports had been submitted by the government.”On September 3, the NHRC sat in two sessions. The Chairman took up 27 cases of bonded labour, which were attended by district magistrates and sub-divisional magistrates of various districts and the principal secretary to the labour department. Simultaneously, the division bench took up 57 cases and disposed of 46 of them, including compliance matters, in which they checked reports of compensation payments of Rs 27 lakh.The NHRC awarded a total of Rs 3.5 crore in compensation to victims over the two days. Apart from matters of custodial deaths, civic negligence leading to fatalities and police excesses, cases involving children were also heard. In one case, wherein a child was taken away by a dog, but the body was never recovered (in Kamrej, Surat), a compensation of Rs 5 lakh was recommended for his family, which hails from Madhya Pradesh.Story continues below this adCases involving the deaths of workers in factories across Gujarat were also heard. In Bharuch, following a major fire and explosion at a chemical factory, five workers had lost their lives, and their families received compensation.In another tragic incident at a chemical plant in Dahej, four workers died after inhaling toxic gases, and their families were compensated with Rs 2 crore.Similarly, in Ahmedabad, three workers died when a large advertising hoarding collapsed, with criminal proceedings initiated against those responsible, though compensation details remained pending.Compensation in Amreli case“In one case, a woman had complained that she was arrested and detained unlawfully. Later, she was released on bail. The police closed the case on the basis that there was no evidence. But the fact that she had suffered in jail cannot be wiped out. So we directed that Rs 7.5 lakh compensation be paid to the lady, even though she had already approached the high court and the matter is still pending there,” said Justice V Ramasubramanian.Story continues below this adThe matter pertains to the alleged unlawful arrest and public parading of an Amreli woman in January 2025, in a case related to the circulation of an allegedly forged letter targeting BJP MLA Kaushik Vekariya.The police action led to a massive outcry across party lines, especially among members of the Patidar community to which she belongs.On the culpability of police personnel involved in the case and whether the onus of compensation should actually be on them, instead of the state exchequer, the Chairman said, “The police have suspended the officials, charge-sheeted them and initiated criminal action. Now the case is pending in court. But the police department taking action does not really solve the problem for the woman. Therefore, we ordered compensation by the state government… no person can be condemned unheard. So, we have asked their employer, the state government, to pay the compensation under vicarious liability. But we have given the state the liberty to recover the compensation amount from the officers.”When asked if the Commission had found systemic problems in the police department, the Chairman said, “The police and revenue departments are the oldest departments from British days. They have no systemic issues… The issues in those departments are the individuals who work at the delivery point.”Story continues below this adOn the nature of complaints against the police, Justice Ramasubramanian said, “We also had a case wherein a person, who was under arrest, went to the toilet and committed suicide. In that case, we fixed the responsibility on the police officers.”New SOPs for bonded labour probe in the offingWith respect to the 27 cases of bonded labour in Gujarat, and the problems in their investigation, the chairperson said, “Many people presume that, in developed states, there will not be a possibility of bonded labour. This presumption arises out of the lack of awareness of the full picture about what is bonded labour… In all 27 cases, the district magistrates had conducted inquiries and reported that they were not cases of bonded labour. This is because of the fact that persons who complained had disappeared by the time the inquiry or inspection was conducted, because of the time gap between the person sending a complaint to us and the NHRC asking for a report, and the inspection taking place.”“We have decided to issue certain advisories as to how to find out the existence of bonded labour… We are now trying to develop an SOP to properly enforce the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act,” he said.On the presumptions made in such cases and the facts in law, the Chairperson said, “In many cases, brick kiln owners admitted that they had paid advance money to a broker to bring workers from outstation… If that advance money is more than the minimum wage, (officials) assume that it is not a case of bonded labour. But, in law, if somebody is hired by payment of advance money with the condition that they must work for three or six months, there is a presumption of bonded labour, even if it may not appear to be so. Hence, we have educated them (district collectors) that this is to be presumed as bonded labour.”Story continues below this adPiyush Goyal, NHRC’s Secretary General and CEO, and Anupama Nilekar Chandra, NHRC’s Director General (Investigations), were also present.