National Human Rights Commission

Also called: NHRC · Topic: Statutory, Regulatory and Quasi-judicial Bodies · NCERT: Class 11, Ch 2 "Rights in the Indian Constitution"

Meaning

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is a statutory body, meaning Parliament created it by law, not the Constitution. It was set up on 12 October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA) 1993. It looks into human rights violations, but it can only recommend action. It cannot prosecute or punish anyone.

• It is India's main watchdog on how the state treats people, from custodial deaths to undertrials kept in jail for years.
• Because its advice does not bind anyone, a common exam question is whether it is a real check on the state or a "toothless tiger".

Explanation

What kind of body it is

• Statutory, not constitutional. No Article of the Constitution creates the NHRC. It comes from the PHRA 1993.
• First came an ordinance: a temporary law the President makes when Parliament is not sitting.

• Parliament then passed the Act.

• Quasi-judicial. It works partly like a court. It can summon people and take evidence, but it cannot give a final, binding punishment.

• What "human rights" means here (s. 2(1)(d)). These are the rights to life, liberty, equality and dignity. They are either guaranteed by the Constitution, or written in international covenants and enforceable by Indian courts [4].
• Why it was set up:
• Other countries were criticising India's human rights record.
• At home, civil-society groups such as the PUCL (People's Union for Civil Liberties) and the PUDR (People's Union for Democratic Rights) kept exposing abuses.
• The UN's new Paris Principles pushed India to act. These are minimum standards for a national human rights institution, adopted in UNGA resolution 48/134 (1993). They set four tests: independence, pluralism (members from many backgrounds), a broad mandate (it covers all rights) and adequate resources.

Composition, appointment and removal (ss. 3–5)

• Composition after the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act 2019 [2]:

Post	Before 2019	After 2019
Chairperson	Only a former Chief Justice of India (CJI)	A former CJI or any former Supreme Court judge [2][4]
Judicial member 1	Sitting or former SC judge	Same [3]
Judicial member 2	Sitting or former HC Chief Justice	Sitting or former HC Chief Justice or HC judge
Expert members	2	3, with at least one woman [2][3]
Deemed members	Chairs of NCM, NCSC, NCST, NCW	Also the chairs of NCBC and NCPCR, and the CCPD [2]
Term	5 years or until age 70	3 years or until age 70, whichever comes first [2]
Reappointment	Once, for 5 years	Allowed, and the 5-year cap is removed [2]

• Deemed members (ex officio members) sit on the NHRC because of another post they hold. Example: the chair of the National Commission for Women.
• Secretary-General. This officer is the chief executive of the office. Since 2019 the Secretary-General can use all administrative and financial powers, but not judicial ones [2].

• Appointment. The President appoints the members on the advice of a six-member committee [4]: 1. the Prime Minister (chair); 2. the Speaker of the Lok Sabha; 3. the Union Home Minister; 4. the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha; 5. the LoP in the Rajya Sabha; 6. the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

• A sitting SC judge or sitting HC Chief Justice can be appointed only after consulting the CJI [4].

• Removal (s. 5) can happen in two ways:
• Proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The President sends the case to the Supreme Court. The Court holds an inquiry and reports. If the Court upholds the charge, the President removes the member [4].
• Direct order of the President. This applies if the member becomes insolvent, takes paid outside work, is of unsound mind, or is convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude (a serious crime that shows bad character) [4].

Functions and powers (ss. 11–20)

• Inquiry (s. 12). It looks into a rights violation, or into a public servant's negligence in preventing one. An inquiry can start in three ways [4]:
• suo motu, meaning on its own, for example after a news report;
• on a petition from the victim or someone acting for the victim;

• on a court's direction.

• Other functions:

• joining court cases on rights violations, if the court agrees;
• visiting jails, juvenile homes and mental hospitals, after first informing the state government;
• reviewing legal safeguards and the things that block rights, including terrorism;
• studying human rights treaties and suggesting how to put them into effect;

• research, spreading human rights literacy and supporting NGOs.

• Civil-court powers (s. 13). During an inquiry it has the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. It can summon witnesses, demand documents and take evidence on oath [4].

• Its own investigators (ss. 11, 14). It has an Investigation Division headed by an officer of at least Director General of Police rank. It can also use Central or state officers [4].

• What happens after an inquiry (s. 18). In order: 1. The NHRC can recommend compensation, prosecution, disciplinary action or interim relief (immediate help) for the victim. It can also approach the Supreme Court or a High Court for directions or writs [4]. 2. The government must send its comments and the action it took within one month [4]. 3. The NHRC publishes its report together with the government's reply [4].

• Annual report (s. 20). It goes to the Centre and is placed before Parliament with a memorandum of action taken [4].

Limits

• Only advisory. Its recommendations do not bind the government. It cannot prosecute or punish anyone.
• Armed forces (s. 19). It can only ask the Central Government for a report and then make recommendations. The Centre must say what action it took within three months [4]. The NHRC cannot investigate these complaints itself.
• Time bar (s. 36(2)). It cannot look into any act done more than one year before the complaint [4].
• No double inquiry (s. 36(1)). It cannot take up a matter already pending before a State Human Rights Commission or another commission set up by law [4].
• It depends on the government:
• Its money comes as grants from the Centre.
• Its investigators are mostly police officers on deputation (lent from police forces).
• Both weaken its independence under the Paris Principles.

In the Constitution and practice

• Legal base: the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, amended in 2019 and 2023 [4]. It protects rights such as Article 21 (life and personal liberty), but no Article of the Constitution creates it.
• State Human Rights Commissions (SHRCs, s. 21 onwards):
• Chairperson: a former Chief Justice or judge of a High Court, plus up to two members. Before 2019, only a former HC Chief Justice could be chair [2][4].
• Appointment: the Governor appoints them on the advice of a committee [4]. The committee has the Chief Minister (chair), the Speaker, the state Home Minister and the LoP in the Assembly. If the state has a Legislative Council, its Chairman and its LoP also sit on the committee.
• Removal: only the President can remove them, on the same grounds as for the NHRC [4].
• Term: 3 years or until age 70, and reappointment is allowed [2].
• Area of work: subjects in the State List and Concurrent List (Seventh Schedule).

• Union Territories: the Centre can give a UT's human rights work to an SHRC. Delhi is the exception: its cases go to the NHRC [2].

• Human Rights Courts (ss. 30–31): these are meant for quick trials of offences that come from rights violations.

• The state government proposes a court. The High Court Chief Justice must agree. A notification then names one Sessions Court in each district [4].
• Each court gets a Special Public Prosecutor. This is a lawyer with at least 7 years of practice, or a government Public Prosecutor [4].

• Few states have made these courts work as real special courts.

• Landmark interventions:

• Machal Lalung (NCERT Class 11): an undertrial (a person kept in jail while the trial is still going on) in Assam. He spent 54 years in custody. An NHRC team found his case, and he was freed in 2005. Lesson: a speedy trial is part of the right to life under Article 21.
• Punjab disappearances: bodies were secretly cremated in large numbers during counter-insurgency operations. In 1996 the Supreme Court sent the matter to the NHRC, which later ordered compensation for the families.
• Gujarat riots 2002: the NHRC reported failures by the state. It asked the Supreme Court to move key trials such as Best Bakery out of Gujarat so they would be fair.
• Custodial deaths: since 14 December 1993, District Magistrates and Superintendents of Police must report every death or rape in custody within 24 hours [8][9]. A late report makes the NHRC presume a cover-up [8]. The post-mortem report, a video recording of the post-mortem and a magisterial inquiry report must follow [8].

• Encounter deaths: guidelines were first issued in 1997. Every death in police action must be reported within 48 hours, followed by post-mortem, forensic (FSL) and inquiry reports [8].

• Current Chairperson: Justice V. Ramasubramanian, a former SC judge.

• President Droupadi Murmu appointed him on 21 December 2024, and he took charge on 30 December 2024 [5].

• He is the first chair to come through the "any former SC judge" route. Check that he still holds the post.

• Global standing (GANHRI): GANHRI is the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. It rates each national body against the Paris Principles.

• India got "A" status in 1999, renewed in 2006, 2011 and 2017 [7]. After a deferral in 2016, "A" status was restored in November 2017 [6].
• The review was deferred in 2023 and 2024. GANHRI's worries were appointments that are not transparent, too little pluralism and police officers on deputation leading investigations [6].
• In March 2025 (45th session, Geneva), GANHRI recommended downgrading India to "B" [6].
• The NHRC called this "wholly unjustifiable" and challenged it under Article 12.1 of the GANHRI Statute. It kept "A" status until the 47th session in March 2026 [6]. The outcome after March 2026 needs checking.

Don't confuse with

• Constitutional bodies such as the National Commission for Scheduled Castes: these come from an Article of the Constitution. The NHRC comes only from an Act (PHRA 1993), so it is statutory.
• State Human Rights Commission: the Governor appoints its members, but only the President can remove them. It covers State and Concurrent List subjects.
• Human Rights Court: this is an existing Sessions Court given extra duties under s. 30. It can try and punish people. The NHRC cannot.
• A court using writ jurisdiction (Articles 32 and 226): a court's orders bind the government. The NHRC's recommendations do not, so it must approach the SC or a HC to get binding directions [4].

Prelims Hooks

• The NHRC is statutory (PHRA 1993) and was set up on 12 October 1993. The Paris Principles come from UNGA res. 48/134 (1993).
• 2019 Amendment: the chair can be a former CJI or any former SC judge. Expert members went from 2 to 3 (at least one woman). The term went from 5 to 3 years. NCBC, NCPCR and CCPD became deemed members [2].
• Selection committee trap: it has 6 members. The Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman is on it. The CJI is not.
• s. 19: it can only ask the Centre for a report on the armed forces. s. 36: it cannot take up acts more than one year old [4].
• Report deadlines: custodial deaths within 24 hours, encounter deaths within 48 hours [8].
• Machal Lalung: 54 years as an undertrial, freed in 2005 after an NHRC inspection.

Mains Points

• The "toothless tiger" debate:
• Its advice does not bind anyone, its power over the armed forces is limited (s. 19), and the one-year time bar (s. 36) shuts out old cases such as disappearances.

• Suggested reforms: make its recommendations binding unless a court overturns them, extend or remove the time limit, and let it investigate the armed forces directly.

• Independence and the Paris Principles:

• It depends on government grants and on police officers lent to it. The executive controls appointments, and retired judges dominate the membership.
• GANHRI's 2025 recommendation to downgrade it shows the cost [6].

• Suggested reforms: its own cadre of investigators, an open and pluralistic selection process, and a charged budget (money that does not need Parliament's yearly vote).

• The 2019 Amendment cuts both ways:

• Good: a wider pool of possible chairs, a guaranteed woman member and more deemed members [2].
• Bad: a 3-year term with unlimited reappointment can make members try to please the government.
• At state level, SHRCs and Human Rights Courts lack staff and money. This weakens rights protection under Article 21 and Article 32 across the federal system.

Related concepts

• State Human Rights Commission
• Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act 2019
• Paris Principles
• GANHRI accreditation
• Human rights courts

Read more

• The National Human Rights Commission and State Human Rights Commissions