This article is written by Priyanka Kansara, a student of NLU, Jodhpur.

Introduction

“The amount of violations of human rights in a country is always an inverse function of the amount of complaints about human rights violations heard from there. The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country.” 

–Daniel Patrick Moynihan

“Human rights” means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforced by courts in India.[1]” All human beings are born with some unalienable rights like life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The importance of these natural rights can be found in the fact that these are fundamental for their proper existence and no other rights can be enjoyed without the presence of rights to life and liberty.[2]

For having the knowledge of the procedure of State Human Rights Commission, firstly we need to get familiar with the strength, the evolution, the functions and the limitations of the Commission. State Human Rights Commission is a Quasi- Judicial Body, which works for the protection of the Human Rights as prescribed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Right adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 16, 1966.

Evolution of State Human Rights Commission

State Human Right Commissions are constituted to enquire into Complaints, which is one of the major activities of State Human Right Commissions. As the nomenclature is indicating, Human Right Commissions are meant to prevent violations of Human Rights[3], which are prescribed under Universal Declaration of Human Rights[4].

The State Human Rights Commission is a Legislative body works for the purpose of redressal of the grievances arising out of violations of human rights. The Human Rights Protection Act, 1993 facilitates that State Government may constitute State Human Rights Commission to exercise the power conferred upon, and perform functions assigned to it under the Act.

State Human Rights Commissions work under the supervision of National Human Rights Commission on different themes i.e. Human Rights, Custodial deaths[5], Police excesses[6], fake encounters[7], Women and Children’s rights[8], Dalit’s right & Minority Communities’ Rights[9], Disability, Bonded Labour and Labourer’s Rights[10] , Armed Forces[11] or any of the entries enumerated in List I or List III in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution applicable to that State.etc.   

How to Complaint with a State Human Right Commission

Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees to all people equality before the law and equal protection of the laws’ within the territory of India. The procedure to file an application with State Human Rights Commission is not a complicated task; any person or the victim himself can present the petition[12], even in the form of an application, to the authorized person of the Commission.

Non-registration of First Information Reports (FIR) is one of the most serious, frequent and common grievances against the police. This problem is compounded when the person against whom a complaint is made is rich and powerful. Police officers must register an FIR immediately on receiving information about a cognizable offence. Persons aggrieved by non-registration of FIR can approach the District Superintendent of Police[13] or the concerned Magistrate[14] to get their complaints registered. Alternatively complaints in this regard can also be filed before the National or concerned State Human Rights Commission.

Functions of the State Human Rights Commission

Section 12 of the Human Rights Act, 1993 states that;

The Commission shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely:-

(a) inquire, suo motu or on a petition presented to it by a victim or any person on his behalf, into complaint of –

(i) violation of Human Rights or abetment thereof; or

(ii) negligence in the prevention of such violation, by a public servant;

(b) intervene in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of Human Rights pending before a Court with the approval of such court;

(c) visit, under intimation to the State Government, any jail or any other institution under the control of the State Government, where persons are detained or lodged for purposes of treatment, reformation or protection to study the living conditions of the inmates and make recommendations thereon;

(d) review the safeguards provided by or under the Constitution or any law for the time being in force for the protection of Human Rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation;

(e) review the factors, including acts of terrorism, that inhibit the enjoyment of Human Rights and recommend appropriate remedial measures;

(f) study treaties and other international instruments on Human Rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation;

(g) undertake and promote research in the field of Human Rights;

(h) spread Human Rights literacy among various sections of society and promote awareness of the safeguards available for the protection of these rights through publications, the media, seminars and other available means;

(i) encourage the efforts of non-governmental organizations and institutions working in the field of Human Rights;

(j) such other functions as it may consider necessary for the promotion of Human Rights.

Section 12 also ensures that whenever, the Commission on receipt of a complaint or suo-motu finds that there is a violation of the Human Rights or abetment by anybody, irrespective of the fact as to whether the violation is by a public servant or any other person, the Commission can initiate proceedings for enquiry. It also, necessarily, follows that when a court of competent jurisdiction, either Civil or Criminal, is already seized of the matter, the Commission has no jurisdiction in the matter to initiate parallel proceedings or order a parallel investigation. In the Case of N.C. Dhourrdial vs. Union of India[15], it was stated that the Commission, which is the creature of statute is bound by its provisions. Its duties and functions are defined and circumscribed by the Act. Of course, as any other statutory functionary, it undoubtedly has incidental or ancillary power to effectively exercise its jurisdiction in respect of the powers conferred to it but the Commission, should necessarily act within the parameters prescribed by the Act creating it and the confines of jurisdiction vested in it by the Act.

The Government is duty bound to consider the recommendations of the Commission and to act upon the same.[16]

“It may also be relevant to notice here that the Commission is a creature of a Statute i.e. Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. It, therefore, cannot obviously clothe itself with such powers which have not been conferred upon it by the aforesaid Statute. Apparently powers of judicial review have not been conferred upon the Commission. Powers of holding parallel proceedings where the matter is already pending before a competent court (civil or criminal), have also not been envisaged by the Act. Under the provisions of the Act, the Commission has been merely constituted with a function to make recommendations to the appropriate Government, when any violation of Human Right  by a public servant, is brought to its notice, after due investigation of the matter. As the language of Section 18 itself suggest that the Commission has only power to make recommendations to the concerned Government or authority, for initiation of proceedings, or for initiation of such action as may be deemed fit. The word “recommendation” necessarily mean “to Suggest.” Such a suggestion cannot be treated to be a decision capable of execution or enforcement.”[17]

 Limitations for the Jurisdiction of Human Rights Commission

• The Commission or the State Commission shall not inquire into any matter after the expiry of one year from the date on which the act constituting violation of human rights is alleged to have been committed.[18] It is, thus, clear that a specific period of limitation has been provided for initiating of proceedings even in connection with violation of human rights by a public servant. The acts which are found to be beyond the aforesaid period of one year from the date, when the complaint in question is filed before the Commission, shall not be inquired into by theCommission or the State Commission. The Commission is enjoined with powers only with a view to inquire into the violation of the Human Rights.
• While inquiring into any complaint of human rights violation, the Commission shall exercise the power of a civil court to the limited extent of securing the presence of witnesses, examination of witnesses, etc. After completing the inquiry, as envisaged in Section18 of the Act, the Commission shall make only a recommendation to the Government such as to make payment of compensation or damages to the complainant or to the victim or member of his family as the Commission may consider necessary, in the event the inquiry discloses violation of Human Rights or negligence in the prevention of such violation.[19] On receipt of the Commission’s report, the Central Government may or may not take any action, depending upon the nature of the findings recorded by the Commission.[20]
• The Commission is not a judicial body. It has only been vested with certain powers of the Civil Court under Section13 for the purpose of inquiry into complaints regarding summoning and enforcing attendance of witnesses, examining them on oath, discovery and production of documents, evidence on affidavit, requisitioning of any public record or copy, issuing Commission for examination of witnesses/documents etc.[21]

But on the other side, it has been stated in U.P. Power Corporation. Ltd. v. National Human Rights Commission[22] that according to S. 18 (a) where inquiry discloses the Commission of violation of Human Rights or negligence in the prevention of violation of Human Rights or abetment thereof by a public servant, it may recommend to the concerned Government or authority to make payment of compensation or damages as the Commission may consider necessary. Thus, the Commission has jurisdiction to recommend compensation as the Commission may consider necessary. The power of the Commission under S. 18 is not initiated by any other provisions or any State Legislature or subordinate legislation. The power of the Commission under S. 18 is in addition to any other provisions covering the subject matter and not in derogation of any other provisions of law.

For a Prudent person- How to File a Complaint with State Human Rights Commission

Any person i.e. person with the spirit of public interest or the Victim himself can file an application by person or by post. There is no particular procedure to file a Complaint. Whenever and wherever, there is violation of Human Rights or exploitation of Human Being; they can inform the State Human Rights Commission within the prescribed time period.

The matter cannot be pending before any Court in the territory of India, which has a requisite Jurisdiction over the matter. Though, where there is some delay in the execution of the matter, any person can complaint the Commission with regard to such undue delay.

The power of the State Human Rights Commission is to give Order to respective Government to have a policy for requisite execution of the matter or the investigation of the matter by itself only; in this situation, the Commission will submit its report to the State Government for the quick elimination of the restitution.

Conclusion

State Human Rights Commission works as an additional tool for the protection of the Human Rights. As per the theme “how and when to Complaint with State Human Right Commission”, though the jurisdiction of the Commission is vast enough to entertain the Complaints in the field of protection of gross violation of Human Rights and Human indeed; in all cases, the Commission cannot take the action suo-moto. All the Human Beings are supposed to be aware of their Rights, which are the proof of their mere existence. The awareness of the same matters prior to the procedure or the functioning of the Commission.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:  

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

[1] Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (henceforth the Act 1993) s. 2 (January 8, 1994).

[2] Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra (2011)1 SCC 694.

[3] s. 12 (a) (i) the Act 1993.

http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/Publications/TheProtectionofHumanRightsAct1993_Eng.pdf, (accessed on July 20, 2015).

[4] The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 (December 10, 1948), http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ (accessed on July 20, 2015).

[5] State Human Rights Commission investigates custodial deaths, The Times of India (October 11, 20114), http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/coimbatore/State-Human-Rights-Commission-investigates-custodial-deaths/articleshow/44778865.cms (accessed on July 20, 2015).

[6] ARUL, P.,  Fake action against police: State Human Rights Commission, , Deccan Chronicle, (July 18, 2015) http://www.deccanchronicle.com/150718/nation-current-affairs/article/take-action-against-police-state-human-rights-commission (accessed on July 20, 2015).

[7] Muzaffar, Imran, ‘Cops threaten us of staging fake encounter in our house’, Greater Kashmir (April 29, 2014), http://www.greaterkashmir.com/news/kashmir/-cops-threaten-us-of-staging-fake-encounter-in-our-house/168939.html (accessed on July 20, 2015).

[8] Hema Malini Crash: Rajasthan State Human Rights Commission Issues Notice to Authorities, NDTV (July 8, 2015), http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/hema-malini-crash-rajasthan-state-human-rights-commission-issues-notice-to-authorities-779388 (accessed on July 20, 2015).

[9] Sharma, Somendra, Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission approaches police against senior member, dna (Ma 29, 2014), http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-maharashtra-state-human-rights-commission-approaches-police-against-senior-member-1992006 (accessed on July 21, 2015).

[10] Dhar, Aarti, Amend Mines Act to contain silicosis: Rajasthan HRC (April 5, 2015) http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/amend-mines-act-to-contain-silicosis-says-rajasthan-state-human-rights-commission/article7070876.ece (July 21, 2015).

[11] Madhukalya, Amrita, 25 years of AFSPA: 43,000 dead in 21 years, dna (July 1, 2015), http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-43000-dead-in-25-years-of-afspa-2100707 (July 21, 2015).

[12] s. 12 (a) the Act, 1993.

[13]Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (henceforth the CrPC 1973) s.  154 (3) (April 1^st, 1974).

[14] s. 156 (3) the CrPC 1973.

[15] AIR 2004 SC 1272.

[16] T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala 2001 (6) SCC 181.

[17] Jai Singh v. Punjab State Human Rights Commission and Anr. C.W.P. No. 20075 of 2003 (decided on April 2, 2005).

[18] s. 36 (2) the Act 1993.

[19] Rajesh Das vs. Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission 2010(5) CTC 589.

[20] State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977) 4 SCC 608.

[21] State of Bihar vs.  Bihar Human Rights Commission AIR 2014 Pat 30.

[22] AIR 2010 All. 139.