State Human Rights Commission Can Only Recommend And Not Direct State Govt For Action Against Policemen: Karnataka High Court Reiterates
The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that the State Human Rights Commission can only recommend and not pass directions to the Government to act against policemen.A Division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice CM Poonacha partly allowed the petition filed by C Girish Naik who works as Inspector of Police and said “The report dated 12.3.2020 issued by the fourth respondent...
The Karnataka High Court has reiterated that the State Human Rights Commission can only recommend and not pass directions to the Government to act against policemen.
A Division bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice CM Poonacha partly allowed the petition filed by C Girish Naik who works as Inspector of Police and said “The report dated 12.3.2020 issued by the fourth respondent [Karnataka State Human Rights Commission] shall not be treated as a direction but as a recommendation.”
The petitioners had argued that in the report dated 12.3.2020, the Commission had issued certain recommendations and that a reading of the said recommendations disclose that they are in the nature of directions which is beyond the scope of Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
The bench noted that by virtue of Section 29 of the Act, the inquiry conducted by the State Commission is regulated by Section 18 of the Act. Section 18(a) of the Act specifically stipulates that where the inquiry discloses the violation of human rights, the Commission may "recommend" to the concerned Government or authority one of the measures stipulated under sub sections (i), (ii) and (iii) of Section 18(a).
Referring to Apex Court judgment in the case of NC Dhoundial v. Union of India & Ors. (2004) and a coordinate bench judgment in C. Gopal v. Karnataka State Human Rights Commission (2015), the court allowed the petition in part and said, “The official respondents shall be at liberty to take suitable action as they may deem fit, based on the said report/recommendation dated 12.3.2020, in accordance with law.”
Appearance: Advocate Satish K for Petitioners
AGA Savithramma FOR R1 TO R3.
Advocate Gopal Krishna Soodi for R4 & R5.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 117
Case Title: C Girish Naik & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: Writ Petition No 7893 OF 2020