- News>
- India
Jurisdiction of NHRC in Gujarat challenged
A public interest litigation was filed in the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday challenging the jurisdiction of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), under Section 36 of the Protection of Human Rights Commission Act, to intervene in violence-torn Gujarat.
A public interest litigation was filed in the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday challenging the jurisdiction of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), under Section 36 of the Protection of Human Rights Commission Act, to intervene in violence-torn Gujarat.
A division Bench comprising Justice D S Sinha, Chief Justice of High Court, and Justice B C Patel issued notices in the petition filed by the city-based Karuna Public Charitable Trust, making them returnable on April 8 next.
The notices have been issued to NHRC, its Chairman Justice J S Verma, Union of India and Gujarat government.
The PIL sought direction that the NHRC or its chairman may not be allowed to investigate or intervene in the circumstances that led to widespread violence in Gujarat specially as they were no more under NHRC's jurisdiction after the appointment of the K G Shah Commission by the state government to probe Godhra train carnage and the subsequent reprisal attacks under the Commission of Inquiry Act.
The petition also sought direction for deletion and removal from the NHRC's records facts, statements, evidences, affidavits, depositions, photographs, documents and materials.
S B Vakil, counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the PIL was filed for restraining the NHRC from making any report on the basis of reports of facts, statements and evidences in any manner collected under the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Commission Act, 1993 as the express provisions of Section 36 (1) provides that the commission shall not inquire into any matter which was pending before a state commission or any other commission duly constituted under any law.
The NHRC cannot take cognizance in the present case as the Gujarat government has already appointed a one-man commission under retired high court judge Justice K G Shah under the provisions of Commission of Inquiry Act, he added.
Vakil submitted that it was improper for Justice Verma to criticise state government even before taking up the matter. The NHRC chairman was well within his right to visit any place in Gujarat and take whatever steps he deemed proper under the Act in fulfilling his constitutional obligations, Vakil said.
"But before proceeding in the matter, if the NHRC pronounces that the state government has failed to discharge its duty in protecting the safety of its people, then it was being unfair," he added. Bureau Report
A division Bench comprising Justice D S Sinha, Chief Justice of High Court, and Justice B C Patel issued notices in the petition filed by the city-based Karuna Public Charitable Trust, making them returnable on April 8 next.
The notices have been issued to NHRC, its Chairman Justice J S Verma, Union of India and Gujarat government.
The PIL sought direction that the NHRC or its chairman may not be allowed to investigate or intervene in the circumstances that led to widespread violence in Gujarat specially as they were no more under NHRC's jurisdiction after the appointment of the K G Shah Commission by the state government to probe Godhra train carnage and the subsequent reprisal attacks under the Commission of Inquiry Act.
The petition also sought direction for deletion and removal from the NHRC's records facts, statements, evidences, affidavits, depositions, photographs, documents and materials.
S B Vakil, counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the PIL was filed for restraining the NHRC from making any report on the basis of reports of facts, statements and evidences in any manner collected under the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights Commission Act, 1993 as the express provisions of Section 36 (1) provides that the commission shall not inquire into any matter which was pending before a state commission or any other commission duly constituted under any law.
The NHRC cannot take cognizance in the present case as the Gujarat government has already appointed a one-man commission under retired high court judge Justice K G Shah under the provisions of Commission of Inquiry Act, he added.
Vakil submitted that it was improper for Justice Verma to criticise state government even before taking up the matter. The NHRC chairman was well within his right to visit any place in Gujarat and take whatever steps he deemed proper under the Act in fulfilling his constitutional obligations, Vakil said.
"But before proceeding in the matter, if the NHRC pronounces that the state government has failed to discharge its duty in protecting the safety of its people, then it was being unfair," he added. Bureau Report