Nodeep Kaur gets bail, medical report shows ‘purplish bruises’ caused by blunt object

The medical report of labour rights activist Nodeep Kaur was submitted in the Punjab & Haryana HC, which will take up the matter of alleged police torture in April.

Labour rights activist Nodeep Kaur | ThePrint

Chandigarh: Labour rights activist Nodeep Kaur, who was granted bail by the Punjab and Haryana High Court Friday, seems to have been beaten up in custody by the Haryana Police following her arrest on 12 January, according to a medical report submitted to the court Friday.

Doctors who examined her at Sonepat Civil Hospital on 25 January, 13 days after her arrest, found bruises on various parts of her body. The medical report, a copy of which has been accessed by ThePrint, added that the injuries are simple in nature and caused by a blunt object or weapon. It says Nodeep has “purplish bruises” of around 10 cm by 7 cm over her left thigh, and of about 5 cm by 6cm on her back.

Nodeep was arrested from the Kundli Industrial Area on 12 January following an altercation between members of the Mazdoor Adhikar Sangathan, of which she is a member, and a ‘quick response team’ that factory owners employ. The charges against her included attempt to murder, assault and extortion.

Wednesday, the high court had taken on record a medical examination report of Nodeep’s associate Shiv Kumar, president of the MAS, who too was arrested by the police on the same charges some days after Nodeep’s arrest. His medical examination had pointed towards the possibility of brutal torture in police custody.

Nodeep’s allegations

In her bail petition before the high court, Nodeep alleged she was arrested by police officials, and suffered multiple injuries due to being beaten and tortured. She was then allegedly taken to the police station in the absence of any women police personnel, and was beaten “black and blue” by police officials.

Nodeep claimed that while in custody at the police station, she was tortured and made to sign blank papers.

However, in a press statement issued on 6 February, the Sonepat police denied these allegations, claiming she had been kept in the ladies’ waiting room of the police station the entire time, and was accompanied by two female police personnel all the time.

Arshdeep Singh Cheema, Nodeep’s lawyer in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, pointed out that her first medical examination was done almost 13 days after her arrest. “By that time, most of the injuries were either healing or had already healed. The medical report clearly shows that she was beaten up while in police custody,” he said.

The police, however, claimed that on the day of her arrest, Nodeep was taken from the police station to the Civil Hospital, escorted by two female personnel the entire time.

“At the civil hospital she underwent not just a general medical examination but was a special medical examination by lady doctor for sexual assault where she herself gave a written statement to the female doctor that she doesn’t want to be medically examined as she had not been assaulted,” the Sonepat police statement read.

Cheema questioned the veracity of this claim. “This is wrong because Nodeep Kaur was not medically examined at all on 12 January. Why would the police give two separate requests, one for a general medical examination and another for sexual assault?” he asked.

Nodeep was sent to judicial custody on 12 January and lodged in Karnal jail. On 15 January, she filed an application before a magistrate requesting a medical examination. The magistrate ordered her examination on 18 January but she was taken for the examination only on 25 January. “This was done with the intention of allowing the injuries to heal,” Cheema claimed.

Apart from Nodeep’s bail application, the high court has also taken suo motu cognisance of email complaints received by the court’s registry. After granting bail to Nodeep, the bench of Justice Avneesh Jhingan will take up the matter of alleged police torture on the next date of hearing in April, as part of these suo motu proceedings.

(A previous version of this report cited Nodeep’s lawyer as saying she was taken for the examination on 23 January, instead of 25 January. The error is regretted.)