Jammu and Kashmir High Court notes that J&K SHRC no longer exists to remand custody torture case

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court recently set aside a 2008 order passed by the erstwhile State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) in a custodial torture case, upon finding that the SHRC order was passed without hearing the police officers who were accused of torturing the victim in custody [Mohd Farooq Khan V/s State Human Rights Commission]..A Bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta observed that the SHRC ordered the payment of ₹1 lakh as compensation, without issuing notice or hearing the alleged perpetrators, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. It, therefore, set aside the compensation award. "Before condemning the petitioners and imposing penalty upon them, it was incumbent upon the Commission to summon all the petitioners and provide them adequate opportunity of being heard. The impugned order of the Commission is, therefore, in violation of the principle of natural justice and cannot sustain," it said. .The Court then considered remanding the case back to the SHRC for a fresh adjudication, only to be informed that the SHRC no longer exists in Jammu and Kashmir following its reorganisation in 2019. The case was, therefore, closed by the High Court. "We could have sent back the case to the Commission for fresh consideration after providing opportunity of being heard to the petitioners but we are told that the State Human Rights Commission does not exist. It is because of this reason, we are inclined to close the matter," the order passed last month said. .The High Court was hearing a plea challenging an order issued by the erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir SHRC in 2008. By the 2008 order, the commission had recommended a compensation payment of ₹1 lakh to a man who claimed that he was subjected to custodial torture by the then Station House Officer of the Darhal Police Station and other unidentified police personnel from the same station.A preliminary investigation found that the man had been arrested under Section 364 (kidnapping) of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) and subjected to long hours of interrogation to determine his involvement with militants. The arrested man also claimed that he was tortured while in custody by police officers. .Based on these findings, the inquiry officer recommended that a formal first information report (FIR) be registered to uncover the truth. Consequently, an FIR was registered under Section 330 (causing hurt to extort confession) of the RPC.The investigating officer eventually concluded that the torture allegations were unsubstantiated and prepared a closure report.Dissatisfied with this outcome, the arrested man approached the SHRC again, which ultimately found the accused cops guilty of torturing him. The SHRC, therefore, recommended that the complainant-man be compensated for such custodial torture. Thereafter, the accused cops (petitioners) approached the High Court against the SHRC order with a writ petition. After considering their submissions, the Court allowed their plea and set aside the 2008 SHRC order. .Advocate Garima Gupta appeared for the petitioners.Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli and Advocate Sugandh Sharma represented the government respondents. None appeared for the man on whose plea the SHRC' compensation order was passed in 2008. .[Read Order]