Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 25782
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. Jayachandran, Shamim Ahmed, JJ
S.Saravanan – Appellant
Versus
The Registrar State Human Rights Commission, Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.P.No. 24182 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.G.Pugazhenthi
For the Respondents: Mr. S. Udaya Kumar for R1, Mr. D.Vijayan for R2 & R3
SHRC rightly dismissed human rights violation claim against police as petitioner drunkenly disturbed station and assaulted officer.
Headnote:First Paragraph: Under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 506(ii) IPC, petitioner accused in criminal case alleged human rights violation in arrest procedure before State Human Rights Commission. Commission examined records and found police followed legal procedure. Court determined no violation occurred as petitioner and friend created disturbance at station in drunken state, assaulting officer. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as whether arrest violated human rights; Commission held police empowered for enquiry with proper procedure followed. Ratio: Drunken intrusion and assault by complainant negated human rights claim, protecting justice delivery. Third Paragraph: Writ petition dismissed, confirming SHRC dismissal.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's drunken station disturbance negates rights violation claim (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. writ dismissed confirming shrc order (Para 4) |
(Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.)
The petitioner herein is a named accused in a criminal case (Crime No.428/2015) involving offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of IPC. Alleging that his arrest is in violation of human rights, he approached the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) seeking action against the Inspector of Police and Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Thiruverkadu Police Station.
2. The SHRC, having gone through the records, has held that the respondent police officers were empowered to conduct enquiry and had followed the procedure as per law.
3. While so, the writ petitioner and his friend, by name Nixon Raj, unnecessarily went to the police station in drunken mode and created a disturbance and also assaulted the Sub-Inspector. Therefore, the allegations of the complainant that there was a violation of human rights is unfounded. Hence dismissed the complaint. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed.
4. We find no merit in the present writ petition, particularly in view of the fact that a criminal case has been registered against the writ petitioner for trespassing into the police station and creating a ruckus. Any further investigation would be detrimental to the justice delivery system. The State Human Rights Commission has rightly dismissed the complaint. Confirming the same, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
