Punjab Human Rights Commission Launches Inquiry into Police Harassment of Elderly Doctor
The Punjab State and Chandigarh Human Rights Commission has initiated a formal inquiry into serious allegations that the Ludhiana city police violated Supreme Court guidelines by coercing an 85-year-old doctor and her ailing husband into attending a police station for questioning. This incident reportedly caused the elderly woman's health to deteriorate so severely that she now requires continuous oxygen support. The commission's directive follows a detailed complaint filed by Dr Sumeet Sofat, who accuses officials at the Division Number 8 police station and Ghumar Mandi post of using defective legal notices to harass his family.
Roots of the Controversy in a December 2024 Incident
The controversy stems from an incident in December 2024, where five family members were booked for allegedly obstructing an income tax raid at their properties. Dr Sofat claims that the police issued notices under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) that were riddled with errors, including incorrect dates and addresses. He argues that this move directly contradicts the Supreme Court's mandate in the landmark case of Satender Kumar Antil versus the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which aims to curb arbitrary police power. Furthermore, the complaint highlights that the offences cited are non-cognisable, meaning the police had no legal authority to exercise such broad powers without obtaining a proper warrant.
Allegations of Severe Procedural Malpractice and Health Impact
The most distressing aspect of the complaint involves the treatment of the family's matriarch, Dr Rama Sofat. Despite clear legal protections—including Section 179 of the BNSS, which explicitly exempts elderly individuals and women from being forced to visit police stations—officers allegedly insisted that the 85-year-old appear in person. Dr Sumeet Sofat stated, "Due to this illegal coercion, my mother's health deteriorated sharply after the visit. She is now on continuous oxygen support as a direct result of the pressure exerted by the officials." This allegation underscores the potential human cost of procedural lapses and raises critical questions about police conduct in sensitive situations.
Official Response and Commission's Directive
The Human Rights Commission has determined that the allegations are sufficiently serious to warrant a high-level review. It has directed the Ludhiana police commissioner to thoroughly examine the conduct of the officers involved and ensure that appropriate action is taken to address any misconduct. Inspector Amritpal Sharma, the station house officer (SHO) of Division Number 8, did not respond to requests for comment, leaving the police's official stance unclear as the inquiry progresses. This case highlights ongoing concerns about police accountability and the protection of vulnerable citizens under Indian law.
