A minor was beaten mercilessly by the offenders in Mirzapur District. Concerned police did not register the first information report. Here this question arises that whether Justice is available to the vulnerable section in Uttar Pradesh.
A Mother’s Fight for Justice: When Police Refuse to Register an FIR for Grievous Hurt to a Minor
This account details a severe alleged violation of human rights and denial of justice in Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh. The complaint was filed with the Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission (UPHRC). It outlines how the police allegedly failed to perform their mandatory duty. This occurred after a minor sustained a serious injury.
The Incident: Grievous Hurt Inflicted on a minor
The core of the matter revolves around a violent assault on a 12-year-old boy in Village Panchayat Naugaon, Mirzapur.
Details of the Assault on minor
| Detail | Information |
| Date of Incident | September 25, 2025 |
| Victim’s Injury | Bone fracture (hand), classified as “Grievous Hurt” under Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). |
| Alleged Offenders | Umar Shankar S/o Ramnath, Laxmikant, and Kaju. |
| Offences Disclosed | Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt (IPC Sec. 325) and Intentional Insult (IPC Sec. 504). |
| Police Station Concerned | P.S. Vindhyachal, Mirzapur. |
The complainant, Abhiraji Nishad, is the minor’s mother and a Block Development Council member. She stated that she promptly took her son for medical treatment. She obtained an X-ray and plaster application which confirmed the fracture. This medical evidence, she contends, unequivocally establishes the commission of a cognizable offence.
The Core Grievance: Unlawful Denial of Justice
Despite presenting conclusive medical evidence of a “Grievous Hurt,” the police personnel at P.S. Vindhyachal allegedly and repeatedly refused to register a First Information Report (FIR). Instead, the complainant claims they were advised to seek private treatment. This act places an illegal financial burden on the victim’s family. It also imposes an administrative burden.
This refusal of registration of FIR in case of minor is the central point of the Human Rights Commission petition. It allegedly forms a direct and flagrant violation of national and international legal mandates.
1. Violation of Indian Laws
The refusal to register the FIR allegedly breaches several key legal statutes and judicial precedents:
- Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) Section 154(1): This section mandates the registration of an FIR when information relating to a cognizable offence is received. Grievous Hurt (IPC Sec. 325) is a Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence.
- Supreme Court Mandate (Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P. and Ors., 2014): The apex court ruled that the registration of an FIR is mandatory if the information discloses a cognizable offence; no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such cases.
- Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty): The denial of the statutory mechanism for justice directly impedes the victim’s right. It obstructs an effective legal remedy. It also affects investigation processes. This situation violates his fundamental right to personal liberty and the protection of law. Here matter concerns the human rights violation of a minor.
2. Violation of Child Rights and International Obligations
Furthermore, the complaint asserts that the inaction violates the spirit of several international human rights agreements, emphasizing that such oversight not only undermines the fundamental principles of justice and equality but also perpetuates a cycle of suffering for those affected.
It highlights how these agreements are crucial in promoting and protecting the inherent dignity of individuals across the globe, thereby reinforcing the need for accountability and proactive measures in safeguarding human rights.
As the absence of action continues, it calls into question the commitment of nations to uphold these vital agreements and poses a significant risk to vulnerable populations who rely on them for protection and support.
- Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC): The State has a responsibility. It must ensure a child is safe from all forms of physical violence. This is an obligation under Article 19. The child also has the right to an effective remedy (Article 4).
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): Article 8 mentions the denial of an effective remedy as a ground for human rights violations. Article 25(2) also cites the failure to provide special care and assistance to children.
Action Requested by the Complainant
In light of the severity of the offence against a minor and the alleged violation of mandatory legal procedure, the complainant has appealed to the UPHRC with the following urgent requests:
- Firstly, Immediate Disciplinary Action: Direct the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Mirzapur. Furthermore,Instruct him to take immediate and disciplinary action against the personnel at P.S. Vindhyachal responsible for the unlawful refusal to register the FIR.
- Secondly, Mandatory FIR Registration: Direct the SSP, Mirzapur, to register an FIR immediately. It should be under IPC Sections 325 and 504 against the named offenders.
- Furthermore, Fair Investigation: Order a fair, impartial, and time-bound investigation into the matter.
- Lastly, Compensation: Recommend suitable compensation for the violation of the minor victim’s human rights. Also, consider the financial hardship imposed by the police’s alleged failure to act.
Evidently, The UPHRC has now formally registered the complaint under Diary Number 6897/IN/2025. The mother has escalated the matter to the Chief Minister’s Secretariat (Ref: GOVUP/E/2025/0113890) and emphasizes the gravity of the situation. She also highlights the continued denial of a basic legal right.
Obviously, The case highlights a critical issue in the justice system. Police have a mandatory duty to register an FIR in cognizable offences. This is especially important when a vulnerable minor is the victim. In the light of it, the Commission’s decision will be significant. It will play a role in determining accountability and ensuring the victim’s right to justice.
Do you have any questions about the legal sections mentioned? Would you like to search for news on similar human rights cases?
Pritesh Kumar submitted non compliance of order passed by U.P.H.R.C. Lucknow by S.P. Mirzapur before U.P.H.R.C. Lucknow in wife’s murder
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.