Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a Police Officer serving with the Goa Police, challenged an order dated 07/01/2016 passed by the Goa Human Rights Commission in proceedings No.13/2013. The Commission had directed the petitioner to pay compensation and recommended departmental action for alleged custodial torture of respondent No.1. The petitioner argued that the Commission relied solely on the testimony of respondent No.1, ignoring medical case papers and other evidence, and that respondent No.1 had a criminal background which was not considered. The Court heard arguments from all parties. The Court analyzed the evidence and found that the Commission's finding was based on the sole testimony of the complainant without corroboration, and that the medical records did not support the allegation of torture. The Court also noted that the complainant's antecedent was relevant but ignored. Consequently, the Court held that the impugned order was perverse and illegal, and quashed it. The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Commission's order and directing refund of the amount deposited by the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Human Rights Law - Custodial Torture - Standard of Proof - Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, Sections 12, 13, 18 - The Commission's finding of custodial torture based solely on the complainant's testimony, ignoring medical records and other evidence, was held to be perverse and unsustainable. The Court held that the Commission must consider all relevant evidence and cannot rely on uncorroborated testimony of the complainant, especially when the complainant has a criminal background. (Paras 4-10) B) Human Rights Law - Compensation - Proportionality - Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, Section 18 - The Commission's recommendation for compensation and departmental action against the police officer was held to be unwarranted as the finding of human rights violation was not established. The Court held that recommendations must be based on a proper finding of violation and must be proportionate to the evidence. (Paras 11-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Goa Human Rights Commission's order directing compensation and departmental action against a police officer for alleged custodial torture was sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Impugned order dated 07/01/2016 passed by the Goa Human Rights Commission is quashed and set aside. The amount of Rs.10,000 deposited by the petitioner shall be refunded.
Law Points
- Human Rights Commission must base findings on credible evidence
- not sole testimony of complainant
- antecedent of complainant relevant
- recommendations must be proportionate and based on material on record.
