LAWS(PAT)-2016-8-90

RANJEET KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR; BIHAR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION; SECRETARY, BIHAR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION; DEPUTY SECRETARY, BIHAR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION; PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (POLICE) GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR; DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR; SENIOR SUPERINT

Decided On August 30, 2016
RANJEET KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR; BIHAR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION; SECRETARY, BIHAR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION; DEPUTY SECRETARY, BIHAR HUMAN RIGHT COMMISSION; PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (POLICE) GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR; DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR; SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE; CITY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE; SUB-DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present intra Court appeal puts to challenge the order, dated 20.04.2016, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7320 of 2013, whereunder a learned single Judge of this Court has disposed of the writ application, filed by the petitioner- appellant herein, holding that the writ petition was premature.

(2.) The order, dated 20.04.2016, aforementioned, was passed in a writ application, which the appellant, as the petitioner, had filed impugning the order, dated 22.01.2013, passed by the Bihar Human Rights Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the BHRC') contending that though the BHRC has no power to review its own order, it (BHRC) had reviewed its order, dated 17.10.2012, by the impugned order, dated 22.01.2013, and reopened the case against the petitioner by issuing notice to the petitioner under Section 16 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (in short, 'the Act').

(3.) Having reopened the case, the BHRC, upon hearing the parties concerned, ordered, on 04.03.2013, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, to recover a sum of Rs.50,000.00 from the salary of the petitioner-appellant herein and make payment of the said amount as compensation to the husband of the complainant-respondent No.11. By the order, dated 04.03.2013, aforementioned, the BHRC has also directed the petitioner-appellant's employer to consider initiating a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner-appellant and also lodge criminal case against him.