Petitioner seek a direction to the respondent to recall of witness power to be invoked to meet the ends of justice for strong and valid reasons with cautions and circumspection, and the same issue was held in the judgement passed by a division bench judge Bhaskar Raj Pr, adhan, J. In the matter, State of Sikkim Versus National Human Rights Commission :-[ W.P.(C) No. 46 of 2021] dealt with an issue mentioned above.
In this case, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that’s the Heard Mr Hissey Gyaltsen, learned Assistant Government Advocate. 2. The State of Sikkim has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ for setting aside the show cause notice dated 13.01.2021 and orders dated 9.6.2021 and 14.9.2021, passed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in NHRC Case No. 1/21/3/2020 relating to the suicide of an undertrial prisoner (UTP) Roshan Chettri in District Jail, Namchi, as being arbitrary and illegal.
On 16.07.2021, the petitioner wrote to the NHRC informing them, inter alia, that a Writ Petition (Civil) No. 02 of 2021 (supra) was filed by the father of the deceased before this court on 09.03.2021 praying for compensation which came up for hearing on 12.03.2021 and this court after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner dismissed it in“on the merit of the case and duly considering the matter”. The petitioner thus urged the NHRC that the petitioner may be exempted from payment of compensation as the proceeding before the NHRC was barred by the principle of res judicata.
The court perused the facts and arguments presented, it was the opinion that – The final inquiry report passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, South Sikkim, Namchi, relates to the procedure under section 176 of the Cr.P.C. and the final report of the Namchi Police Station relates to the procedure under section 174 Cr.P.C. Both did not deal with the issue before the NHRC. Consequently, this ground is also devoid of merits. 21. Having examined each of the grounds raised by the petitioner, this court is of the considered view that the present writ petition is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.
Judgment reviewed by Sakshi Mishra