Karnataka HC Quashes Human Rights Commission’s Recommendation Against Police Officer, Remands Custodial-Torture Complaint For Division-Bench Hearing

Respondent No. 2 complained to the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission (the Commission) that he had been harassed and illegally detained at a police station.

An initial inquiry found the allegations unsubstantiated, but a subsequent inquiry reported that he had been taken to the station without a written complaint or FIR, detained there, and that Rs. 40,000 had been received from him.

The Commission accepted the later report and recommended disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, a police officer, under the Karnataka State Police (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules, 1965.

The petitioner’s review petition was dismissed.

The Court applied Regulation 11(4) of the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission (Procedure) Regulations, 2007, which provides that complaints relating to custodial death, custodial torture, custodial rape, and illegal detention are “normally” to be heard by a Division Bench, unless the Chairperson directs otherwise.

The Court interpreted “normally” as prescribing the usual course and held that departure from it required a special order of the Chairperson; an exception could not be arbitrary.

The Commission submitted that the 2007 Regulations had been repealed by the 2020 Regulations and that the corresponding provision was directory, but the Court’s decision rested on Regulation 11(4) of the 2007 Regulations.

The complaint alleged illegal detention and custodial torture, matters expressly listed in Regulation 11(4).

The Court treated a Division Bench hearing as the prescribed usual course and concluded that a Single Bench could hear such a complaint only if the Chairperson had directed that departure by special order.

As the impugned orders were made by a Single Bench and the required direction was absent, the Court found them unsustainable for lack of jurisdiction, without deciding the merits of the allegations.

It remitted the matter to the Commission for fresh adjudication in accordance with Regulation 11(4) of the 2007 Regulations, keeping the parties’ contentions open.