TAGE LAPUNG Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (AT: ITANAGAR)
STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
AJIT BORTHAKUR,J. -
(1.) Heard Mr. T.T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Kardak Ete, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh, assisted by Mr. Hage Laxmi, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of State Respondents.
(2.) According to the petitioner, the brief facts of the case, in hand, is that the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, was enacted for better protection of human rights by constituting a National Human Rights Commission and also the State Human Rights Commissions and Human Rights Courts. Section 2 (1)(d) of the Act defines "human rights" as the rights relating to life, liberty, equality, dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the international covenants and enforceable by Courts in India. The above rights are traceable to Part-III of the Indian Constitution guaranteering the fundamental rights and particularly Articles 14, 19, 20, 21 and 22. Sections 21 to 29 of Chapter-V of the Act deals with the constitution of State Human Rights Commission and its function thereto. According to the Act, the State Commission consists of a Chairperson who has been the Chief Justice of a High Court and four members.
(3.) It is the contention of the petitioners that the Apex Court in the case of D.K. Vasu V. State of West Bengal, reported in (2015)8 SCC 744, held that the State of Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, and Tripura within the period of six months from the date of judgment, shall set up the State Human Rights Commissions for their respective territories with or without resorting to the provisions of Section 21 (6) of the Protections of Human Rights Act, 1993. However, the State of Arunachal Pradesh is yet to constitute the State Human Rights Commission and human rights Courts.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.