Plea In J & K & Ladakh High Court Seeks Reopening Of Human Rights Commission, Women Commission Etc. To Adjudicate Pending Cases

Highlighting multiple reasons for seeking the establishment of a separate, judicial body having three branches at Jammu, Srinagar, and Chenab region, the petitioner avers that the same is pertinent in the interest of the people of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, because the cases of violations prior to the removal of Article 370 and Article 35-A are pending and the new instances of violations are not even recorded.

It has been argued that the approach of the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs is draconian since they are denying citizens of the information that they lawfully ask for and compromising their right to information.

Preferred by Human Rights Activist Nikhil Padha, the petition also seeks for the institution of a separate reporting agency consisting of at least 1 judicial member to record the cases of human rights violation.

"It is not plausible for the victims of human rights violations to travel all the way to the National Human Rights Commission situated in New Delhi to report the wrong-doings done to them. It is a hindrance in ensuring access of justice to all which is a fundamental right as extended in Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India," the petition states.

Contending that the discontinuation of cases pending before the State Human Rights Commission is violating the basic fundamental right to fair trial and justice, the petition seeks for the reopening of 765 cases and its continuation till its final stage of adjudication.

Padha in his petition has averred that dissolution of the State Commission for Women has added to the plight of the women ever since the country went into lockdown which resulted in an upsurge of cases of domestic violence.

Arguing that encounters taking place every other day in J & K are a massive threat to Article 21, the petitioner has contended that such instances cause a blot on the conscience of the constitutional fabric of the country.

It has also been contended that peaceful protests held by victims of those who suffer from brazen human rights violations are tagged under UAPA which is violative of Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India.

"Ground report as compiled shows the extent and gravity of human rights violations happening in the Union Territory of J&K subsequent to the Revocation of Article 370 and Article 35-A. In absence of bodies and institutions to deal with such violations, it becomes all the more traumatic for the victims to get their fair share of justice," petition states.

Case Title: Nikhil Padha v. Union of India