PIL On Functioning Of Human Rights Courts Under S.30 Of PHR Act: Kerala High Court Seeks State Govt's Response - 2025-09-17

Kerala HC Seeks State's Response on PIL Alleging Non-Functioning of Human Rights Courts

Ernakulam: The Kerala High Court has sought a response from the state government in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that calls for the proper functioning of Human Rights Courts as mandated under Section 30 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. The court, however, advised a petitioner alleging custodial torture to first approach the State Human Rights Commission before seeking judicial intervention.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji was hearing the PIL filed by G. Samuel, which sought judicial intervention to ensure the effective administration of these specialized courts.

The Petitioner's Plea

The petition, filed as WP(PIL) NO. 113 OF 2025, presented three main prayers: 1. To issue guidelines for the proper functioning of Human Rights Courts. 2. To direct the Law Secretary to implement rules and procedures for the effective administration of these courts. 3. To issue guidelines for the proper functioning of the State Human Rights Commission.

The core of the petitioner's case revolved around the argument that the Human Rights Courts, envisioned under the Act, were not operating effectively in the state, thereby denying citizens a crucial forum for justice.

Arguments in Court

During the hearing, the learned State Attorney, Mr. N. Manoj Kumar, contended that the Human Rights Courts have been duly notified in the State of Kerala. He requested time to file a detailed statement to substantiate this claim and provide an update on their operational status.

Regarding the third prayer concerning the State Human Rights Commission, the petitioner's counsel highlighted an instance involving Petitioner No. 4, who allegedly suffered custodial torture but whose complaint was not being properly considered.

The Bench questioned whether the aggrieved petitioner had formally filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission. The counsel admitted that no such complaint had been filed.

Court’s Observations and Directions

The High Court observed that it could not presume inaction on the part of the State Human Rights Commission without a formal complaint being lodged first. The Bench expressed its confidence in the Commission, stating, "Without Petitioner No.4 approaching the Human Rights Commission, it cannot be presumed that the State Human Rights Commission will not consider the complaint. If the Petitioner approaches the State Human Rights Commission, we have no doubt that the Commission will look into the issue with all seriousness if the case is so made out."

Following this observation, the petitioner's counsel agreed not to press the prayer related to the Commission's functioning at this stage and stated their intention to approach the Commission directly for relief.

The Court has kept the PIL pending to adjudicate on the first two prayers concerning the functionality of Human Rights Courts. The State Attorney also informed the court that the related issue of CCTV camera installation and functioning in police stations is currently under the Supreme Court's consideration, and relevant details will be submitted in the present case.

Final Decision

Granting the State Attorney's request for time, the High Court has adjourned the matter and posted it for the next hearing on October 7, 2025 . The case will proceed solely on the issue of ensuring the proper and effective functioning of Human Rights Courts in Kerala.