HUMAN RIGHTS AND ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA PART-2

With regard to this, the concept of time bound delivery of justice is not found in certain or some cases in accordance with time, circumstances, requirements and other connected things under the exceptions. With regard to this, it is well settled that Law is the instrument of social change & also Law is a normative science hence due to the procedures, technicalities and formalities too much time is wasted or destroyed unnecessarily which is very fiercely, grave, the most serious, irreparable violation of human rights & its law because the spent time never come back also no one or none can return or revert the time in worldwide.

                                        Now the questions or questionnaires are demanding or seeking their own replies or answers but no effect of the same. Now who is, was and shall be responsible, liable, accountable for the same. How far the destruction, detrimental, impairment, derogation, violation, contravention, infringement of human rights & its law shall be continued or up to what limit or extension in India. Who or when or how will wake up our slept governments in this regard. In this relation, the foundation of reposed confidence or believe into the heart of people or masses is on the brink of ending which is not good for anyone and such a day is not so far away. In despite of all aforesaid, the Indian Judiciary has played & is playing a key role in “sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic republic India” For the protection, development and preservation of Human Rights Law which has gone down or created the history. The Indian Judiciary is one of the foundation pillars of Indian democracy which is independent & unified in India. 

The Indian Judiciary still has given the most positive judicial responses towards the protection, development & preservation of human rights & its Enforcement system, subjecting to all the required exceptions which can be seen summarily with the help of delivered some important cases as: -Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras held that Supreme Court is the protector of Fundamental Rights, State of Madras v. B.G. Rao decided that the Supreme Court is a watchful sentinel of Fundamental Rights. Menka Gandhi v. Union of India : -Hon’ble Apex Court of India said that the origin of Human rights is freedom movement. The major purpose to place Human Rights in Constitution of India has to develop the Banyan tree of freedom in India. Husn Aara Khatoon v. State of Bihar held Right to speedy Trial, P.U.C.L. v. Union of India as to Right of hunger victim to get edible things free of cost, Menka Gandhi v. Union of India Right to life with dignity, M.M. Haskat v. State of Maharashtra Right to free Legal Aid, S.P. Gupta v. Union of India , M.C. Mehta v. Union of India held that any person can write a letter to the Supreme Court of India or High Court respective and seek the justice. The hon’ble court can initiate the required procedure; the same shall be called as Epistolary Jurisdiction of the Court. Vishakha and others v. State of Rajasthan and others Protection from sexual harassment of women at work place, Neelbati Behra v. State of Orissa : -in this case Article 5 (9) of International covenants on Civil and Political Rights 1966 with under Article 21 Constitution of India has been applied. Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra it is the leading & landmark Judgment delivered by the Constitutional Bench of Hon’ble five Justices of Supreme Court, in this case laid down the Rule of Curative Petition; the Apex Court of India has power in respect of Curative Petition. With respect to it, Furthermore in the first time, the Supreme Court was opened for Judges to conduct the hearing of the final plea against the execution of Yakub Memon for his role at about 03 Am in Mumbai blasts case 1993. After about 90 minutes, the Judges rejected the Appeal of Memon for stopping his execution consequently he was hanged in Central Jail, Nagpur, a little before 07 Am.

In the light of this, conducting hearing of this case Our Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Unprecedented History created as Supreme Court opens at around 3.20 Am which shows the most positive Judicial response (s) in the protection & preservation of human rights. This hearing by the Supreme Court is highly appreciable in democratic Country. In addition to the above said, the Hon’ble Justice Shri Shahrukh Jimi Kathawalla, 58 years old High Court of Bombay, Mumbai, has conducted hearing of the various cases approximately for 16 hours from Friday Morning (04 May, 2018) to Saturday Morning (05 May, 2018) up to 3:30 Am continuously, taking the break for 20 minutes only during the period. The Hon’ble Justice has disposed of 135 cases in the aforesaid time duration. It probably so a long time hearing in the history of 156 years of the hon’ble High Court of Bombay which was conducted as mentioned hereinbefore. Such effective, most positive, favourable and protective responses of our hon’ble Indian Judiciary are leading, landmark, historic, significant and worth highly appreciating in larger interest of people to protect, develop & preserve of human rights. In this respect, before the enactment of The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, an ordinance as the protection of Human Rights Ordinance 1993 was promulgated which has been repealed under section 43. After that the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 has been enacted by the Central Legislature of India which has been enforced on 28 September, 1993. This Act provides the constitution of the National human Rights Commission, State human Rights Commissions in States and Human Rights Courts for the better protection of Human Rights and other required & related matters. The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 has also not been & is not being implemented so far absolutely in respect of some certain cases or matters as required as in according to the mandate, spirit, objectives of the law & intension of the legislature concerned. There are only 26 State Human Rights Commissions in 29 States& 07 Union Territories of India.

The remaining States of India did not establish or constitute the State Human Rights Commissions (S.H.R.C.s) to so far in accordance with the provisions of the act. The vacant posts have also not been fulfilled in some State Human Rights Commissions, with the name as ‘Human Rights Courts’ specially have not been established as required by the act. The better protection of human rights and other related things of it are not being done in the spirit or object of the act and as per intention of the Legislature.