Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.SUNDAR, K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, JJ
D.Selvakumari – Appellant
Versus
State Human Rights Commission Tamilnadu – Respondent
ORDER :
K .GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition challenging the order dated 14.05.2018 passed by the State Human Rights Commission in S.H.R.C case No.7861/2013.
2. The writ petitioner is a police official and respondent in the complaint preferred by the 2nd respondent before the State Human Rights Commission, i.e., the 1st respondent herein. The State Human Rights Commission held that the 2nd respondent was subjected to Human rights violation by the writ petitioner without following the procedure laid down in law and passed the impugned order stating that the complainant is entitled to get a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only ) from the writ petitioner as compensation and recommended the Government to pay the said amount and to recover the same from the writ petitioner. The SHRC also recommended to initiate disciplinary action against the writ petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner is before this Court challenging the order of SHRC in S.H.R.C case No.7861/2013 dated 14.05.2018.
Brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this writ petition are as follows:
3. The Writ Petitioner while working as Inspector of P
Allegations of human rights violations must be substantiated by evidence; mere claims without corroboration do not establish a violation.
The court upheld the State Human Rights Commission's findings of police misconduct, confirming the need for law enforcement to respect citizens' rights and the burden of proof on the accused to dispr....
Police officials must adhere to lawful procedures in arrest and detention; failure to do so constitutes a violation of human rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific evidence supporting the violation of human rights and the proper closure of complaints after due enquiry.
The State Human Rights Commission must provide a personal hearing in serious cases involving prominent individuals to ensure procedural fairness.
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....
Writ petition allowed as the petitioner failed to establish human rights violations due to lack of supporting evidence.
Illegal detention beyond 24 hours and assault by police constitutes human rights violation, upholding SHRC recommendations.
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
