New Delhi, July 06: The pro-active role undertaken by the National Human Rights Commission in the Best Bakery case after a special court in Gujarat aquitted all the 21 accused has divided the legal experts on the issue whether the human rights body has exceeded its brief. The experts gave conflicting opinions whether the NHRC could take an interventionist role after the verdict is delivered. <>bR> While senior advocate P N Lekhi and M N Krishnamani feel that commission should avoid making observations on the judgement of the case, others like Rajya Sabha member and eminent jurist F S Nariman, constitutional expert P P Rao and Rajeev Dhavan say there is no bar on the NHRC from expressing its opinion.
Justifying the concern of NHRC chairman Justice A S Anand that the acquittal of all the accused in the case was prima facie a "miscarriage of justice", Nariman, Rao and Dhavan feel that commission was right in suggesting the state government to go for an appeal in the higher court.

However, Lekhi and Krishnamani say that the commission should not comment on the merits and demerits of the proceedings as its role is merely recommendatory.

"He (chairman) was commenting on the merits and demerits of the proceedings. Those ad hoc observations were without any examination of record and lacks authenticity. Members of NHRC should avoid such ad hocism because it carries wrong message to the international community," Lekhi said.
Bureau Report