Madras High Court upholds ₹1 lakh compensation to man for custodial torture by police

The Madras High Court recently upheld the State Human Rights Commission's (SHRC) order directing a compensation of ₹1,00,000 to a man subjected to custodial torture by police. .A Bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice M Jothiraman opined that the police officials have a critical role in maintaining law and order, while upholding human rights. "Their duties include i) protecting citizens ii) upholding the laws and iii) maintaining tranquility. The police officials must respect human dignity, avoid discrimination and protect vulnerable groups. The police officials must adhere to human rights standing orders to build trust, prevent abuse and promote accountability," the Court observed.By upholding human rights, police officials shall effectively perform their duties while respecting citizens' fundamental rights and dignity, the Court further added..The Court was hearing pleas filed by two police officers challenging an SHRC order directing them to pay ₹1 lakh as compensation to one Rajnikanth. Rajnikanth had alleged that on December 20, 2013, he was picked up at 3 AM, illegally detained, stripped and assaulted in custody. He further claimed that after being remanded, the officers took him to a secluded spot near Puzhal police station and again assaulted him, thus violating his human rights..The SHRC found that Rajnikanth had been subjected to humiliation by the Inspector and Sub-Inspector and their actions amounted to a violation of rights, personal liberty and dignity. Holding the government vicariously liable, it ordered erring police officials to pay a compensation of ₹1 lakh to Rajnikanth. The government accepted the recommendation and issued a money sanction order, which was also challenged in the present pleas by the police officers. .The counsel for police officials argued that the SHRC’s conclusion of a human rights violation was unfounded and it failed to consider that Rajnikanth was booked for the offence of cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. They further contended that the NHRC guidelines were not breached and also questioned the compensation amount, alleging it was arbitrarily fixed without proper discussion.In response, the government counsel maintained that the SHRC’s order was binding and enforceable. He submitted that the Commission could direct the State to pay compensation to the victim, and in doing so, it could subsequently recover the amount from the erring officers..The Court held that SHRC’s recommendations under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act are binding, and once accepted, they are legally enforceable unless turned down through judicial review."By applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Full Bench in 2021 (3) CTC 129 (cited supra), the State Human Rights Commission which has been assigned a constitutional role with statutory backing, its recommendations are not liable to be ignored. It is needless to mention that any act done by the officials of the Government in violation of the Human Rights then the Government either directly or vicariously liable for the act done by the officials. Since there was no challenge to the recommendations given by the state human rights commission by the government in terms of section 18(e) of the Act," the Court noted.Therefore, the Court found no grounds to interfere with either the Commission's recommendation or the State Government's order and proceeded to dismiss the pleas.Advocate M Rajasekar appeared for the petitioners.Advocates TC Gopalakrishnan, M Venkateshwaran and M Babu appeared for the respondents..[Read Order]