Writ petition seeking mandamus directing State Human Rights Commission to conduct an enquiry into allegations of abuse and assault by a police official. Court quashed Commission's non-adjudication order and directed enquiry.
Impugned order set aside; Commission directed to consider complaint on merits and pass orders within 3 months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :03.07.2019
CORAM
The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN
and
The Honourable Ms.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
W.P.No.33245 of 2005
K. R. Thanikachalam
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Director General of Police, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road, Chennai -4.
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of writ, directing the 3rd respondent to conduct an enquiry in Case Nos. 373/005 and 8936/2004 made by the petitioner as per Sec.29 of the Human Rights Act 1993.
For Petitioner : Mr. N. A. Nissar Ahmed
For Respondents: M/s. A. Sri Jayathi,
Special Government Pleader
for R1 & R2
Mr. K.P. Prabhu Raj for
Mr. Srinivas for R3
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was delivered by P.T.ASHA, J)
The above Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to the 3rd respondent to conduct an enquiry in case Nos.373 of 2005 and 8936 of 2004 on the basis of the complaint preferred by the petitioner under Section 29 of the Human Rights Act, 1993.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To,
1.The Director General of Police, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road, Chennai -4.
+1cc to Mr.R.Srinivas, Advocate Sr.55592
W.P.No.33245 of 2005
ca[co] srg 22/08/2019
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the State Human Rights Commission was justified in forwarding a complaint regarding a human rights violation instead of adjudicating it itself.
Whether the writ petitioner was entitled to a writ of Mandamus directing the Commission to conduct an enquiry on the merits.
Whether the Commission directed to consider the complaint and pass orders within a specified timeframe.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K.R. Thanikachalam
Director General of Police
City Police Commissioner
State Human Rights Commission, Tamil Nadu
K.K.Sasidharan
P.T.Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
