The Bombay High Court, while hearing a Public Interest Litigation, expressed serious concern over the prolonged inaction on the recommendations of the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission (MSHRC) relating to compensation for victims of human rights violation. The Court pulled up the State Government and sought clarifications as to why over 136 recommendations issued by the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission since 2013 were still pending with any action and attention. The Court further observed that compensation in such cases is not a mere administrative formality but a recognition of the victims’ rights.
The Court further expressed its displeasure in strong words during the hearing and has warned the State of imposing 12% interest p.a. on the compensation awarded by the MSHRC to the victims of human rights violations. The petitioner invited the Court’s attention to a reply to an RTI Application which disclosed that over 75% of such recommendations thereby awarding compensation and other reliefs to victims of human rights violations, are still pending with the State Government to be acted upon, in blatant violation of the statutory mandate laid down by the Protection of Human Rights Act.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Shri Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad noted that “a grim picture has been portrayed in this Public Interest Litigation as to how the recommendations of the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission for compensation to the victims are pending unattended.”
Appearing in person, petitioner and advocate Satyam Atul Surana relied upon several judgments of the Supreme Court and various High Courts to contend that recommendations of the Human Rights Commission cannot be treated lightly and must receive due consideration.
The Bench acknowledged that the issues raised in the petition indicate a lack of concrete action at the State Government level on the Commission’s recommendations. At the same time, the Court held that it would be inappropriate to pass any final directions without first hearing the government’s stand and directed them to file a detailed affidavit within four weeks.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on 12 January 2026.
Case: Satyam A Surana vs State of Maharashtra, Through the Chief Secretary and Ors.
