The findings of a human rights commission can be quashed if they lack proper evaluation of evidence and procedural adherence.

(Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.)

The writ petition is filed challenging the order of the State Human Rights Commission, passed in SHRC Case No.9375 of 2018 dated 20.10.2022.

2. The sum and substance of the case in hand is as follows:-

The writ petitioner, K.Silaimani, then Sub Inspector of Police, attached to S.P.Pattinam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, alleged to have misbehaved with the complainant, N.Sivanraj.

3. In the complaint, it is stated that the writ petitioner, is a police Sub Inspector, used to have a lavish life, by earning illegal money and violating the human rights. One such incident is in respect of the complainant, a practising lawyer and his senior, while travelling in the car to attend a funeral on 27.08.2018 at about 8.30 a.m., were intercepted by team of police personnel for checking the vehicle. When the complainant was interrogated as to produce the vehicle documents and licence, it was promptly produced by him. However, the Sub Inspector of Police, who was standing little away from the place, gave instruction to the constable to get Rs.2000/- as bribe to clear the vehicle and thereafter, when that was questioned, there was wordy altercation and also allegation of physical assault. The further case of the complainant is that thereafter the relative of his senior was called to the place, who came in the two wheeler and after getting bribe of Rs.2000/- , receipt of Rs.100/- was issued as if there was violation of traffic rules for pillion riding in a two wheeler bearing registration No.TN 65 K6189.

4. The writ petitioner has contested the petition before the Human Rights Commission, stating that it is a false complaint given with motive. He has also produced documents to substantiate his defence and on the date of alleged incident, he was on duty in the police station, and not an vehicle check up duty. That apart, he has taken out an application for production of records from the police station for perusal and verify the fact that fine for traffic rules violation was collected on 26.08.2018 and not on 28.08.2018 as falsely alleged in the complaint.

5. The Human Rights Commission, after perusing the records and the contention of the parties, has framed the following points for consideration :-

1. Whether the respondent violated the human rights of the petitioner?

2. If so, what compensation the petitioner is entitled to ?

6. After examining the complainant and four witnesses on the side of the writ petitioner, the Human Rights Commission has concluded with the following recommendation:-

a) The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Department, Secretariat, Chennai shall pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) to the complainant Thiru N.Sivanraj, son of Nagaraj residing at No.14/M-7, Anna Nagar, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

b) After making such payment the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Chennai, may recover a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) from the respondent, as per rules.

c) The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu May take disciplinary action against the respondent.

7. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed seeking Writ of Certiorari to quash the order of the Human Rights Commission passed on

20.10.2022.

8. Notice to the respondents was served through Court, but no representation on behalf of the respondents.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner placed two points for consideration. One, the records maintained at the police station would clearly indicate that on the alleged date of occurrence, i.e., on 28.08.2018, the writ petitioner was on duty in the