'Must Respect Human Dignity': Madras HC Upholds SHRC Order Against Cops Over Custodial Torture

Last Updated:June 26, 2025, 16:32 IST

"The police officials must adhere to human rights standing orders to build trust, prevent abuse and promote accountability," the court said.

The SHRC had recommended that the Tamil Nadu government pay Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation to the victim and recover Rs. 50,000 each from the two officers involved.

The Madras High Court recently dismissed writ petitions filed by two Tamil Nadu police officers, thereby upholding the State Human Rights Commission’s (SHRC) 2018 order that found them guilty of subjecting a man to illegal detention, torture, and extortion.

“The police officials must respect human dignity, avoid discrimination and protect vulnerable groups. The police officials must adhere to human rights standing orders to build trust, prevent abuse and promote accountability. By upholding human rights, police officials shall effectively perform their duties, while respecting citizen’s fundamental rights and dignity," court stressed.

In December 2013, Rajinikanth, the complainant, was arrested in connection with a cheating case registered by the M3 Puzhal Police Station. He later filed a complaint before the SHRC, alleging grave human rights violations at the hands of Inspector D Babu Rajendra Bose and Sub-Inspector S Mani. According to Rajinikanth, he was picked up around 3 AM, stripped naked in custody, beaten, coerced into surrendering gold jewellery, and then further assaulted en route to the jail. He made repeated complaints, including one to the Magistrate at the time of remand, which was recorded.

After due inquiry, the SHRC in 2018 concluded that the allegations were credible. It recommended that the Tamil Nadu government pay Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation to Rajinikanth and recover Rs. 50,000 each from the two officers involved. The government accepted the recommendation and issued a Government Order in 2022.

Bose and Mani challenged the SHRC’s order and the consequent government action, claiming procedural irregularities, lack of proper evidence, and denial of natural justice.

However, the division bench comprising Justices J Nisha Banu and M Jothiraman observed that the SHRC’s recommendation was binding and enforceable under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

Court referred to the Full Bench decision in Abdul Sathar v. Principal Secretary to Government (2021), reiterating that SHRC recommendations are adjudicatory in nature and cannot be ignored.

It also noted that the police officers failed to challenge the SHRC’s 2018 order in a timely manner and only acted after the government issued its recovery directive in 2022.

Interestingly, the high court also flagged the absence of a legitimate medical report produced during remand, despite the complainant’s visible allegations and request for medical examination under Section 54 CrPC.

Accordingly, the petitions were dismissed without costs, and the court emphasised the need for strict adherence to human rights norms by law enforcement personnel.

Salil Tiwari

Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr...Read More

Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr...

Read More

Location :

First Published:

News india 'Must Respect Human Dignity': Madras HC Upholds SHRC Order Against Cops Over Custodial Torture