IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.19422-19426 OF 2014 C/W WRIT PETITION NO.18358 OF 2014 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NOs.19422-19426 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
1. SRI S M KRISHNA KUMAR S/O LATE D. MANCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS WORKING AS POLICE CONSTABLE CPC 641, EAST P.S., MANDYA TOWN.-571401.
2. SRI CHETAN KUMAR S/O SRI. S. SIDDARAMU AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS WORKING AS POLICE CONSTABLE CPC 152, WEST P.S.
MANDYA DISTRICT-571401.
3. SRI M NANJUNDASWAMY S/O LATE MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS WORKING AS POLICE CONSTABLE PC 698, MADDUR P.S, MANDYA DISTRICT 571428.
4. SRI J YOGENDRA S/O SRI. B. JOGAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS WORKING AS POLICE CONSTABLE PC 249, SRIRANGAPATNA P.S. MANDYA DISTRICT-571438.
5. SRI MAHADEV GOWDA S/O SRI. SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS POLICE HEAD CONSTABLE CHC 12, ARAKERE P.S. SRIRANGAPATNA TQ., MANDYA DISTRICT-571438.
… PETITIONERS (BY MR. S.P. KULKARNI, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE SOUTHERN RANGE, MYSORE-570008.
3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION BANGALORE-560001.
4. THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
5. SRI B SHADAKSHARA SWAMY S/O LATE M. BASAPPA DEVARU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS B.G. PURA HOBLI DODDABBUHALLI VILLAGE MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT 571430.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1 – R3 MR. VIDUR NAIR, ADV., FOR MR. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV., FOR R4 MR. D.K. ROHITH, ADV., FOR R5) - - -
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 5.3.2014 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, BANGALORE [R-4] BEING ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS AND OPPOSED TO LAW, EQUITY AND JUSTICE VIDE ANN-L & ETC.
WRIT PETITION NO.18358 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
SRI N JAYAKUMAR S/O R.NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS SUB INSPECTOROF POLICE HULLAHALLI POLICE STATION NANJANGUD TALUK-571301 MYSORE DISTRICT.
… PETITIONER (BY MR. S.P. KULKARNI, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY IT’S CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY AND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE SOUTHERN RANGE, MYSORE-570008.
3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION BANGALORE-560001.
4. THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION BANGALORE-560001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
5. SRI. B. SHADAKSHARA SWAMY S/O LATE M. BASAPPA DEVARU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS B.G. PURA HOBLI DODDABBUHALLI VILLAGE MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571430.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2 MR. VIDUR NAIR, ADV., FOR R3 & R4 MR. D.K. ROHITH, ADV., FOR R5) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT.5.3.14, MADE IN HRC NO.542/13, PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, BANGALORE [R4] BEING ARBITRARY ERRONEOUS & OPPOSED TO LAW, VIDE ANN-L & ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
petitioners.
Smt.Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Mr.Vidur Nair for Mr.T.Suryanarayana, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
Mr.D.K.Rohith, learned counsel for respondent No.5.
2. The writ petitions are admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same are heard finally.
3. In these petitions under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners has assailed the validity of the order recommendation dated 05.03.2014 by which the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission in exercise of powers under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1998 has made a recommendation that a sum of Rs.3 Lakhs be paid by the State Government by way of compensation to the next of kin of the deceased. The petitioners are the police officers against whom the allegations were leveled. The allegations were leveled by the relatives of the deceased. No recommendation has been made by the State Human Rights Commission against the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners have no locus to challenge the recommendation made by the State Human Rights Commission dated 05.03.2014. However, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to such remedy, which may be available to him under law as and when occasion so arises.
With this observation, petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS