Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 36370
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J
SHAHJAHAN H. – Appellant
Versus
THE KERALA STATE COMMISSION FOR MINORITIES – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 38930 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.R.SUNIL, SMT.GOPIKA V.S.
For the Respondents: SRI.R.T.PRADEEP, SRI.GAUTHAM KRISHNA E.J., SRI.NIRANJAN T. PRADEEP, SRI.PHENEY BALAKRISHNAN, SMT.MEGHA BIJU, SRI.ABBY JOHN T.K., SRI.DHEERAJ A.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Kerala State Minority Commission lacks authority to register criminal cases, as its mandate is limited to recommending and providing remedies for minority welfare.
Headnote:(A) Kerala State Minority Commission Act, 2014 - Sections 9, 12 - Authorization of the Commission - The Commission's powers do not extend to registering criminal cases; it can recommend and provide remedies for minority welfare only. (Paras 1, 3, 6)
(B) Jurisdiction of the Commission - The Commission exceeded its jurisdiction under the act by directing criminal investigations, which is reserved for law enforcement. (Paras 6)
(C) Procedural Fairness - The petitioners were not provided with notice or an opportunity to be heard prior to the registration of the FIR. (Paras 3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners argued that the FIR registration by the 1st respondent was unauthorized and based on a purely civil matter, causing reputational harm.
Findings of Court:
The Court held that the Kerala State Minority Commission lacked the authority to issue the directive for criminal investigation, leading to the quashing of the FIR.
Issues: The main issue concerned the Commission's jurisdiction to initiate criminal proceedings against government officers.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Kerala State Minority Commission does not possess the authority to interfere with criminal investigations or to direct the registration of cases, reaffirming the necessity of legal jurisdiction limits.
Result: FIR quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the commission acted beyond its authority in directing criminal investigations. (Para 3) |
| 2. court reviews commission's powers in relation to criminal law. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. fir quashed due to lack of jurisdiction by the commission. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 7th day of July, 2025 The petitioners state that the registration of Ext.P1-FIR pursuant to the directions issued by the 1st respondent in proceedings as per M.C. O.P. No.118/2024/ALP-DT is illegal and without any authority. The Kerala State Minority Commission Act , 2014 doesn’t empower the 1st respondent to register criminal cases against persons. Sections 9 and 12 of the Kerala State Commission for Minorities Act, 2014 give powers to recommend and to provide remedial measures with an intent to protect the welfare of minorities in Kerala.
2. A perusal of Ext.P2 complaint submitted by the
4th respondent would show that it is only a dispute of civil nature. The 1st petitioner is a Police Officer who joined duty during 1999 and serving the Police Department with all integrity reputation and credentials. Ext.P2 is only a complaint of civil nature to be adjudicated by a Civil Court and there is no element of any criminal offence. The 4th respondent without the support of any document diminished the morale of two Government servants. Consequent to the registration of Ext.P1-FIR, the 1st petitioner was forced to face departmental actions.
3. The law laid down by this Court in W.P.No.15556 of 2018 is that the Commission constituted under the Act is having limited powers of recommendation and remedial measures. The 1st respondent exceeded its jurisdiction by passing orders in M.C. O.P. No.118/2024 dated 13/08/2024 to register a criminal case against the petitioners. The 1st respondent has not issued any notice to the petitioners and did not provide an opportunity of being heard before issuing the directions to the 2nd respondent to register criminal case, contend the petitioners.
4. Heard.
5. The 1st respondent-Commission has directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to register a crime against the petitioners as per Ext.P3. Consequently, the Deputy Superintendent of Police directed the Station House Officer to register a crime and to report the matter before the 1st respondent-Commission.
6. The issue whether the Kerala State Commission for Minorities has such powers has came up for consideration before this Court in W.P.(C) No.21659 of 2017.
This Court held as follows:
“The first respondent Commission constituted under Section 3 of the Kerala State Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Act, 2007 (for short 'the Act'), for exercising the powers and performing the functions assigned to it under the Act, is undoubtedly a creature of the statute. Therefore the Commission cannot exercise any function or power other than what is conferred under the Act. Section 9 of the Act deals with the functions of the Commission. The relevant portion of Section 9 is extracted below:-
“9. Functions of the Commission.- The Commission shall have the following functions, namely:-
“(a) to investigate and examine the working of various safeguards provided in the Constitution of India or under any other law for the time being in force or under any order of the Government for the welfare and protection of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in Kerala.
(b) to inquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in Kerala and to take up such matters with the appropriate authorities.”
Under Section 9 (b), the Commission is empowered to enquire into specific complaints with respect to the deprivation of rights and safeguards of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in Kerala and to take up such matters with the appropriate authorities. The deprivation of rights and safeguards in Section 9 (a) cannot be equated with the term 'atrocity' in the Prevention of Atroc
