What governments did, and what it cost the country

What was done

The Maharashtra government appointed the commission, then wound it up in January 1996 before it had reported. The commission nevertheless produced a report in 1998 finding police and others responsible; the state government issued an action-taken memorandum, accepted most police reform recommendations, and dismissed one police officer. The Supreme Court later directed a CBI investigation into the Hari Masjid firing and a committee to ensure compensation to eligible victims.

What it meant for the country

The riots caused about 900 deaths and 2,036 injuries, and the commission found police officials participated in violence, making the matter harmful.

• About 900 people died and 2,036 were injured in the December 1992 and January 1993 riots, as stated by the Supreme Court in 2022. [3]
• A total of 2,267 criminal cases were registered and 8,673 persons were arrested in connection with the riots, according to a Maharashtra government affidavit. [2]
• The Srikrishna Commission found that police officials named in paragraph 1.30 of Volume I actively participated in riots, communal incidents, looting and arson. [3]
• In the Hari Masjid firing, the commission found the police version fabricated and the firing unjustified, resulting in the killing of six Muslims. [4][7]
• The Maharashtra government wound up the commission in January 1996 before it submitted its report, delaying the inquiry. [3][2]
• One police officer was dismissed from service following disciplinary inquiry initiated after the commission's report. [3]
• The Supreme Court in 2022 directed a committee to ensure compensation is paid to eligible victims of the 1992 and 1993 riots. [3]

Step by step

1. 1992-12-06
   The Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was demolished; communal riots followed in Bombay from 6 December 1992. [1][3]
2. 1993-01-25
   The Maharashtra government appointed Justice B.N. Srikrishna, a sitting Bombay High Court judge, as a one-man commission under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, with terms covering the circumstances, responsibility, police measures and long-term measures. [1][3]
3. 1993-07
   The commission commenced work, called for public affidavits and recorded statements of about 400 witnesses, including police officers. [1]
4. 1993-07-08
   The Maharashtra government issued a resolution to give financial assistance to persons affected by the riots and the serial bomb blasts. [3]
5. 1996-01-23
   The Maharashtra government disbanded the commission, citing inordinate delay in submitting its report. [3][2]
6. 1998-02-16
   The commission's report was dated 16 February 1998; it was published on 16 December 1998. It found the causes were political, socio-economic and demographic; named police officials in paragraph 1.30 of Volume I as actively participating in riots, communal incidents, looting and arson; and in the Hari Masjid firing found the police version fabricated and the firing unjustified, killing six Muslims. [3][4][7]
7. 2000-01-07
   The State of Maharashtra stated before the Bombay High Court that it would refer the commission's report and conclusions to the Crime Branch, CID, Mumbai for further investigation and action. [4]
8. 2000-08-31
   The Maharashtra government constituted a Special Task Force for further investigation and action on possible offences concluded by the commission report. [4]
9. 2008-02-07
   The Maharashtra government issued a notification consenting to CBI inquiry into the Hari Masjid incident as dealt with in the Srikrishna Commission report, Volume II, paragraphs 24.23 to 24.25. [4][7]
10. 2008-12-18
    The Bombay High Court directed a CBI investigation into the Hari Masjid firing incident, finding the police version fabricated and the firing unjustified. [4]
11. 2022-11-04
    The Supreme Court directed a committee to ensure compensation is paid in terms of the 8 July 1993 government resolution to various categories of victims of the 1992 and 1993 riots. [3]

The documents

1. [1] Gangadhar Laxman Reddy vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ... Court, indiankanoon.org
2. [2] The Committee For The Protection Of ... vs The Chief Minister ... Court, indiankanoon.org
3. [3] Shakeel Ahmad vs Union Of India . on 4 November, 2022 Court, indiankanoon.org
4. [4] Farook Mohammed Kasim Mapkar vs The Commissioner Of Police on ... Court, indiankanoon.org
5. [5] Need To Place The Report Of Shrikrishan Commission On Riots ... Court, indiankanoon.org
6. [6] Rusy Noshirvan Mody & Another vs The State Of Maharashtra ... Court, indiankanoon.org
7. [7] State Of Maharashtra vs Farook Mohammed Kasim Mapkar & Ors on ... Court, indiankanoon.org
8. [8] Mobina Begum/Indian Assn. For ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And ... Court, indiankanoon.org
9. [9] Ms.Anju Rajbhar vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 4 July, 2013 Court, indiankanoon.org
10. [10] Shri Madhav Ramkrishna Chitnis And Ors. vs State Of ... Court, indiankanoon.org
11. [11] N.P. Lotlikar vs C.B.I. And Another on 11 November, 1992 Court, indiankanoon.org
12. [12] Indra Sawhney Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. Etc ... Court, indiankanoon.org

Compiled from the documents cited, 12 Oct 2026

What was done

Parliament enacted the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which the Central Government used to constitute the National Human Rights Commission; the NHRC was in fact constituted on 12 October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Ordinance of 28 September 1993, and the Act (No. 10 of 1994) followed on 8 January 1994.

What it meant for the country

The Act created a statutory national mechanism for the protection of human rights, defining 'human rights' as the rights to life, liberty, equality and dignity guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India, and establishing the NHRC on 12

• The Act defined 'human rights' as the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India. [2][15][16]
• The National Human Rights Commission was constituted on 12 October 1993, giving India a dedicated statutory body to exercise the powers and perform the functions assigned under the Act. [6][17][18]
• The Act empowered State Governments to constitute State Human Rights Commissions under Section 21, and provided for Human Rights Courts specified under Section 30. [2]
• The NHRC's functions under Section 12 include reviewing the factors, including acts of terrorism, that inhibit the enjoyment of human rights and recommending appropriate remedial measures. [2]

Step by step

1. 1993-09-28
   The Protection of Human Rights Ordinance was promulgated on 28 September 1993, as reported by Wikipedia. [6]
2. 1993-10-12
   The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was constituted on 12 October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Ordinance of 28 September 1993. [6][17][18]
3. 1994-01-08
   The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (Act No. 10 of 1994) was enacted and commenced on 8 January 1994, providing for the constitution of a National Human Rights Commission, State Human Rights Commissions in States and Human Rights Courts. [3][4][7]
4. 2019
   The Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2019 amended the 1993 Act, including adding the chairpersons of the National Commission for Backward Classes, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, and the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities as members of the NHRC. [2][8][9][10][11][19]

The documents

1. [1] PDF The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - India Code Official, indiacode.nic.in
2. [2] PDF The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 Official, nhrc.nic.in
3. [3] THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, 1993 ACT NO. 10 OF 1994 Official, mha.gov.in
4. [4] PDF The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 [As amended by the Protection ... Official, mshrc.gov.in
5. [5] Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, Objective, Provisions, Structure Web, vajiramandravi.com
6. [6] National Human Rights Commission of India - Wikipedia Web, en.wikipedia.org
7. [7] Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
8. [8] Lok Sabha passes The Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2019 Official, pib.gov.in
9. [9] Press Release: Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
10. [10] Parliament Passes the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2019 ... Official, pib.gov.in
11. [11] Bill Summary - PRS Legislative Research Research, prsindia.org
12. [12] PDF The Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2012 Parliament, sansad.in
13. [13] Section 3 in Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
14. [14] Press Release Page | Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
15. [15] Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
16. [16] Section 2 in The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 Court, indiankanoon.org
17. [17] Press Release Page | Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
18. [18] Press Release: Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
19. [19] The Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2019 Research, prsindia.org
20. [20] Section 3 in Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
21. [21] PDF Government of India Answered on Strengthening the Mechanism for ... Parliament, sansad.in

Compiled from the documents cited, 30 Sept 2026

What was done

Parliament enacted the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 to give effect to the Proclamation on the Full Participation and Equality of the People with Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region adopted at Beijing in December 1992. The Act was later replaced by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

What it meant for the country

The Act secured rights for persons with disabilities, including three per cent reservation in government employment and free education for children with disabilities till age eighteen, and its 2016 replacement expanded recognised disability categories from seven to twenty-one.

• The Act provided that three per cent of vacancies in government employment shall be reserved for persons with disabilities — one per cent each for blindness or low vision, hearing impairment, and locomotor disabilities and cerebral palsy. [4]
• The Act required appropriate Governments and local authorities to ensure that every child with a disability has access to free education in an appropriate environment till the age of eighteen years. [1][3]
• The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, which replaced the 1995 Act, covers 21 disabilities as against seven disabilities in the 1995 Act, as stated by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. [13]

Step by step

1. 1992-12-01
   A meeting convened by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, held at Beijing from 1st to 5th December 1992, adopted the Proclamation on the Full Participation and Equality of People with Disabilities in the Asian and Pacific Region. [11][17]
2. 1995-08-26
   The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Bill, 1995 was introduced in Lok Sabha. [14]
3. 1996
   The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Rules, 1996 were notified by the Central Government under section 73 of the Act, published vide Notification S.O. .../853. [8]
4. 1996-01-01
   The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 was enacted by Parliament as Act No. 1 of 1996. [1]
5. 1996-02-07
   The Act came into enforcement. [4]
6. 2004
   The Supreme Court, in W.P. (Civil) No. 187 of 2004 (Disabled Rights Group v. Chief Election Commissioner), directed compliance with the provisions of the 1995 Act in relation to facilities for electors with disabilities. [10]
7. 2016
   The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (Act No. 49 of 2016) was enacted, replacing the 1995 Act. [7][13]
8. 2017-04
   The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 came into force, replacing the 1995 Act. [9]

The documents

1. [1] PDF The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of ... Official, mahapolice.gov.in
2. [2] PDF Status report On implementation of the PWD Act, 1995 in the state of ... Official, nhrc.nic.in
3. [3] PDF Pwd Act, 1995 the Persons With Disabilities Web, deepshikhaindia.org
4. [4] PDF The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of ... Web, thenationaltrust.in
5. [5] PDF The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of ... Web, bba.org.in
6. [6] THE PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (Equal Opportunities ... - NPdO Web, npdo.org
7. [7] The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
8. [8] The Person With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of Rights ... Court, indiankanoon.org
9. [9] PDF Press Brief on Performance Audit of 'Implementation of Rights of ... Official, cag.gov.in
10. [10] disabled right group W.P. No. 187 of 04 new Official, hindi.eci.gov.in
11. [11] The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of ... Court, indiankanoon.org
12. [12] The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of ... Court, indiankanoon.org
13. [13] PDF rpwd ACT ENGLISH - Comptroller and Auditor General of India Official, cag.gov.in
14. [14] PDF , eune WITH DISABILITIES (EQUAL PROTECTION OF RIGHTS PARTICIPATION ... Parliament, eparlib.sansad.in
15. [15] Section 47 in The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities ... Court, indiankanoon.org
16. [16] PDF Answer - eparlib.sansad.in Parliament, eparlib.sansad.in
17. [17] The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of ... Court, indiankanoon.org
18. [18] Section 8 in The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities ... Court, indiankanoon.org

Compiled from the documents cited, 30 Sept 2026

What was done

Parliament enacted the Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Act, 1995, inserting Article 16(4A) to permit reservation in promotions for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Parliament then enacted the 81st, 82nd and 85th Amendment Acts of 2000-2001, and the Supreme Court in M. Nagaraj upheld the provisions as enabling, subject to conditions.

What it meant for the country

The amendments secured reservation in promotions, carry-forward of unfilled vacancies and consequential seniority for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, while the Supreme Court made their use conditional on demonstrated backwardness, inadequate representation and efficiency.

• Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes obtained a constitutional basis for reservation in promotions, which Article 16(4) had been held not to permit. [2][6]
• Unfilled reserved vacancies could be carried forward to subsequent years and treated separately from the vacancies of the year they are being filled. [4]
• Promotions under Article 16(4A) could carry consequential seniority. [3][4]
• The Supreme Court conditioned reservation in promotions on identification of backwardness, inadequate representation and maintenance of overall efficiency. [4]
• In April 2012, the Supreme Court struck down Uttar Pradesh Government Seniority Rules for reservation in promotions because the state had not undertaken the required exercise. [7]

Step by step

1. 1992-11-16
   The Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India observed that reservation of appointments or posts under Article 16(4) is confined to initial appointment and cannot extend to reservation in the matter of promotion. [1]
2. 1995
   The Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Act, 1995 inserted clause (4A) in Article 16 to extend the benefit of reservation in promotions to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. [2][6]
3. 2000
   The Constitution (Eighty-first Amendment) Act, 2000 inserted Article 16(4B) on carrying forward unfilled vacancies reserved for SCs/STs to subsequent years, to be treated separately from the vacancies of the year they are being filled. [4]
4. 2000
   The Constitution (Eighty-second Amendment) Act, 2000 inserted a proviso to Article 335 on relaxing qualifying marks. [4]
5. 2001
   The Constitution (Eighty-fifth Amendment) Act, 2001 explicitly added "with consequential seniority" to Article 16(4A). [3][4]
6. 2006
   The Supreme Court in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 212, upheld the constitutional validity of the 77th, 81st, 82nd and 85th Amendment Acts relating to reservation in promotions for SCs and STs. [4]
7. 2012-04
   The Supreme Court struck down the Uttar Pradesh Government Seniority Rules providing for reservation in promotions, holding that the state government had not undertaken any exercise to identify backwardness and inadequate representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. [7]
8. 2012-09-05
   The Constitution (117th Amendment) Bill, 2012 was introduced in the Rajya Sabha, seeking to substitute Article 16(4A) and stating that the provision shall override Article 335. [7]

The documents

1. [1] PDF The Constitution (Seventy-seventh Amendment) Act, 1995 Official, legislative.gov.in
2. [2] Article 16 (4A) in Constitution of India - Indian Kanoon Court, indiankanoon.org
3. [3] Reservation in Promotions: Understanding Article 16(4-A) and ... Web, juris-codex.com
4. [4] M. Nagaraj vs Union of India - Drishti Judiciary Web, drishtijudiciary.com
5. [5] English Releases - Press Information Bureau Official, pib.gov.in
6. [6] PDF THE CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2022 - Digital Sansad Parliament, sansad.in
7. [7] The Constitution (117th Amendment) Bill, 2012 - PRS Legislative Research Research, prsindia.org

Compiled from the documents cited, 30 Sept 2026