Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S.KARNIK, GAUTAM A.ANKHAD
Dilip Lalchand Porwal Adult, Indian Inhabitant – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. permitting amendment to delete party. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenging mshrc's compliance directions. (Para 3) |
| 3. writ premature before government action under section 18. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. property dispute; direct fir registration. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. shrc jurisdiction limited to human rights violations. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. civil property disputes not entertainable by shrc. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. precedents distinguishable on facts. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 8. quash mshrc order; pursue legal remedies. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
M. S. KARNIK, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. On an oral request made, the learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to delete the respondent No.2 - The Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission from the array of the respondents. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.
3. The challenge in this Petition is to the order dated 31st May 2023 passed by the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission (‘Commission’, for short). The Commission in paragraph 11 has issued the following directions :-
“11. Accordingly for the reasons discussed above the present complaint stands closed and disposed off with a di
State Human Rights Commissions lack jurisdiction over civil property disputes absent specific human rights violations; such complaints are non-entertainable under regulations and must be pursued in c....
The Human Rights Commission lacks jurisdiction in private property disputes and must not interfere in cases already pending in civil courts.
It is trite law that when evidence is required to be produced to adjudicate rights of the rival contentions, moreso in the nature of a civil dispute, the same cannot be entertained by the Commission,....
The court emphasized that human rights commission findings should not interfere with ongoing criminal prosecution, highlighting the need for clear evidence when linking law enforcement officers to al....
Police misconduct, including illegal detention and assault, constitutes a violation of human rights under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
A quasi-judicial body must comply with principles of natural justice by providing a reasoned order and an opportunity for both parties to be heard before making a decision.
Human Rights Commission's recommendations binding but judicially reviewable; cannot direct compensation without inquiry evidence proving public servant negligence causing human rights violation via r....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
