Hero Image

UP Human Rights panel can order relief for victims: Allahabad high court

ALLAHABAD: The Allahabad High Court has held that the UP Human Rights Commission has full power and authority to direct the district magistrate and superintendent of police to make the compensation to the victims of violation of human rights.


Dismissing a writ petition filed by state of UP and two others, a division bench comprising Justice Bala Krishna Narayana and Justice Prakash Padia declined to interfere in the order dated November 7, 2016, passed by UP Human Rights Commission by which it had directed DM/SP Fatehpur to pay compensation of Rs 1 lakh to opposite party Ansarul Haq and to inform the Commission.



Giving this decision, the court said that the Commission is entitled to do so where it finds either a violation of human rights or negligence in the prevention of violation of human rights.

As per facts of the case, Haq sustained injuries on the head and in the right eye due to riots on January 14, 2016, during a procession on the occasion of Makar Sankranti at Jahanabad of Fatehpur district. After the aforesaid incident, Haq moved an application to the chief minister of the state, claiming for the compensation. In this regard, a certificate was also issued in his favour by the chief medical officer, Fatehpur, stating therein that the right eye of the complainant was 100% blind and left eye was normal and as such the opinion was recorded to the effect that the disability suffered by him was 30%.

Subsequently, the complainant moved an application to the UP Human Rights Commission, Lucknow in this regard. The Commission by an order dated November 7, 2016, directed the DM/SP Fatehpur to pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation to the complainant and inform the Commission.

Aggrieved by the said order of the Commission, the state government filed the present writ petition, challenging the aforesaid order of the Commission.

The stand taken by the state government was that the order passed by the Commission was perverse and without jurisdiction and have been passed without application of judicial mind and as such is liable to be quashed.

It was further argued that as per law, where the 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 to the complainant or to the victim or the members of his family as the Commission may consider necessary.

Also, it was argued that in so far as the present case is concerned, no finding whatsoever has been recorded in the order impugned that there was any violation of human rights or there was any negligence in the prevention of violation of human rights or abetment thereof by a public servant. It was further provided that the Commission may recommend to the concerned government or authority to make payment of compensation or damages to the complainant or to the victim or to the members of the family, but by the impugned order the Commission directed the district magistrate/superintendent of police to make the payment of compensation as such the order impugned passed by the Commission was without jurisdiction.

READ ON APP