PATNA, July 9 -- The Bihar State Human Rights Commission (BHRC) has directed the state to pay an interim compensation to parents of social activist Bharat Bhusan Tiwari, allegedly killed in an encounter at Bilauti village, Bhojpur on June 17. The order was uploaded on Wednesday. The state government has already instituted a judicial probe into the death of 28-year-old Tiwari whose parents have alleged the social activist was gunned down by police despite having surrendered by throwing the gun he was holding at that time.The victim's mother Asha Devi has lodged a police complaint in this regard. Tiwari was arrested after a standoff with the local police after a video had purpotedly showed him pointing a pistol at some policemen. The BHRC order said that, 'Without going into the question of liability of the state, shall pay suitable amount as ex-gratia payment to the parents of the deceased by considering them as dependants of the deceased and keeping in mind the loss suffered by them due to death of their son". However, the amount of compensation has not been decided and has been left to the discretion of the government. Soon after the encounter, which raised an outrage, BHRC had on June 22 directed the chief secretary, DGP and Bhojpur SP, asking them to submit their replies/report in four weeks and the case were directed to be posted for hearing on July 13. Reports said the state sought two more weeks time from the BHRC to submit its report on the alleged killing of Bharat Bhusan Tiwari. BHRC accepted the request and fixed the next hearing in the matter on August 3. BHRC registrar retired judge Shailendra Singh said the order has been communicated to all parties involved in the case, including chief secretary, DGP and Bhojpur SP, by email. Copies were also sent by post. The Commission observed the investigation is yet to be completed and therefore, it would not be appropriate to fix the legal responsibility of the State at this stage. Despite this, the commission said that under Section 18 (c) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the state should consider giving interim compensation to the next of kin. "Today an application has been filed by State of Bihar through the ADG (Law and Order) on behalf of all Respondents, for seeking extension of time by further two weeks to submit replies/reports on the ground that the matter is under investigation and lot of information is being collected from various authorities and offices. The Commission is also apprised by the respondents that the subject matter in issue is also under judicial inquiry by Inquiry Commission headed by the former Judge of Patna High Court. With this submission, a request for adjournment of these cases is made on behalf of the respondent," said the order. The order has also mentioned that it is not in dispute that Bharat Bhushan Tiwari died and post-mortem examination report shows he died because of haemorrhage and shock and its complications resulting from the injury caused by projectile firearm. Thus, the case undoubtedly involve the tragic loss of a young life. It needs to be put on record that public law jurisprudence dictates that a final order of compensation against the State relies on clear establishment of vicarious tortious liability of the State. Further, the order has said, "For coming to this conclusion, conclusive proof that the State machinery acted with unprovoked illegality, malice gross negligence exceeding the lawful boundaries is essential. It is seen from submissions of the State before this Commission that the matter is under investigation as well as under inquiry. It is yet to be culminated in filing of a final report the State submission of report of the Judicial Inquiry". "Whether fatal injury sustained by the deceased is caused by the functionaries of the State is not yet established nor any such inference can reasonably be drawn at such premature stage. Therefore, at this stage it would be very unfair to determine tortious liability of the State as evidentiary dust is yet to settle and primary investigation is yet to be finalised. Therefore, I see no reason to refuse to grant adjournment as prayed on behalf of the State," order said....