Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, three police officers, challenged the order dated 8.5.2012 passed by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission in HRC.R.P No.1/08 and HRC.No.856/08, whereby the Commission directed them to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000 each to respondent No.1 for alleged illegal detention and assault. The petitioners contended that the Commission had no jurisdiction to pass such an order without affording them an opportunity of hearing and that the Commission exceeded its powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. The High Court examined the scope of the Commission's powers and held that while the Commission can make recommendations, it cannot pass a final order directing payment of compensation without hearing the affected parties. The court quashed the impugned orders, observing that the Commission acted without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice.
Headnote
A) Human Rights Commission - Jurisdiction - Section 18 of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - The Commission while making a recommendation under Section 18 cannot pass a final order directing payment of compensation without giving an opportunity of hearing to the persons likely to be affected - Held that the Commission's order directing payment of compensation to the complainant without hearing the police officers was without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice (Paras 1-10).
B) Human Rights Commission - Inquiry - Section 17 of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - The Commission has powers of a civil court for inquiry but cannot adjudicate disputed questions of fact or award compensation without proper evidence and hearing - Held that the Commission's order was beyond its scope as it acted as a trial court (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission had the jurisdiction to pass an order directing payment of compensation to the complainant without affording an opportunity of hearing to the police officers and whether the Commission exceeded its powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned orders dated 8.5.2012 and 3.7.2008 passed by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Human Rights Commission
- Scope of Section 18 of Protection of Human Rights Act
- 1993
- Power to award compensation
- Requirement of opportunity of hearing
- Distinction between inquiry and adjudication
Case Details
WP No. 18208 of 2012 (GM-RES)
G.Narendar, C.M. Poonacha
Sri P.S.Rajagopal, Sri K C Shantakumar, Smt. Shilpa S.Gogi, Sri Suresh Desai, Sri Gopal Krishna Soodhi
Sri B S Manjunath, Sri Arun Kumar, Sri Annaiah
Sri C Munikrishna, Sri Mujib Pasha, The Commissioner of Police, The State of Karnataka, The Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Karnataka, The Director General of Police, The Karnataka State Human Rights Commission
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging orders of the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the impugned orders dated 8.5.2012 and 3.7.2008 passed by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission.
Filing Reason
The petitioners, police officers, were directed by the Human Rights Commission to pay compensation to respondent No.1 without being heard.
Previous Decisions
The Karnataka State Human Rights Commission passed orders dated 3.7.2008 and 8.5.2012 directing the petitioners to pay compensation.
Issues
Whether the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission had jurisdiction to pass the impugned orders directing payment of compensation without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
Whether the Commission exceeded its powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that the Commission acted without jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice.
The respondents contended that the Commission had the power to award compensation under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The Karnataka State Human Rights Commission, while exercising powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, can only make recommendations and cannot pass a final order directing payment of compensation without affording an opportunity of hearing to the persons likely to be affected. Such an order is without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard the learned senior counsel Sri P.S. Rajagopal for the petitioners.
The Commission while making a recommendation under Section 18 cannot pass a final order directing payment of compensation without giving an opportunity of hearing to the persons likely to be affected.
Procedural History
The Karnataka State Human Rights Commission passed an order on 3.7.2008 in HRC.No.856/08 and an order on 8.5.2012 in HRC.R.P No.1/08 directing the petitioners to pay compensation. The petitioners filed the present writ petition challenging these orders.
Acts & Sections
- Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993: Section 18, Section 17
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
