Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Rule 6 of Karnataka Human Rights Courts Rules, 2006

Case Snapshot

• Case Name: Sayad Asifulla v. State of Karnataka & Ors.

• Citation: 2026 INSC 964

• Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice (not specified in provided text)

• Date of Judgment: August 25, 2026

• Area of Law: Human Rights Law, Criminal Procedure, Delegated Legislation, Rule-Making Power

The Judgment in One Line

Supreme Court holds Rule 6 of Karnataka Human Rights Courts Rules valid, allowing victims to directly approach Human Rights Courts without prior Commission inquiry.

Why This Judgment Matters

This judgment clarifies the dual mechanism for human rights protection under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. It establishes that Human Rights Courts under Section 30 and Human Rights Commissions under Sections 12-18 operate independently—not sequentially. Victims can directly approach the Human Rights Court without first seeking recourse to the Commission. The ruling reaffirms the broad rule-making power of State Governments under Section 41 to prescribe procedural machinery for Human Rights Courts. A significant victory for access to justice in human rights violations.

Background

The appellant, an accused in a criminal case, filed a private complaint before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Human Rights Court, alleging human rights violations by police officials during his custody. The complaint was registered as PCR No. 1/2024, and the Court directed registration of FIR, leading to Crime No. 15/2024.

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.