One Of The Most Barbaric Instances Of Police Atrocity: Supreme Court Grants ₹50L Compensation To Police Constable In Custodial Torture Case; Directs CBI Probe
|Allegedly, the victim's genital organs and testicles were amputated, pepper was sprinkled on his private parts, and he was given electric shocks which led to a fracture of his foot.
The Supreme Court has granted Rs. 50 lakhs compensation to a police constable who was allegedly tortured when he was in custody and has also directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct probe into this.
The Court was deciding Criminal Appeals filed against the Judgment of the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, Srinagar, which dismissed the inter-connected Petitions of the victim seeking registration of the FIR against the police personnel, transfer of investigation to CBI, and quashing of FIR against him.
The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed, “The unprecedented gravity of this case involving brutal and inhuman custodial torture, characterised by the complete mutilation of the appellant’s genitalia, represents one of the most barbaric instances of police atrocity which the State is trying to defend and cover up with all pervasive power. The medical evidence conclusively establishes that such injuries are impossible to be self-inflicted. The respondent’s theory of suicide attempt crumbles under scrutiny when examined against the timeline and the medical evidence.”
The Bench remarked that only investigation by an independent agency, i.e., CBI can restore public faith in the criminal justice system, ensure that this dehumanising crime does not go unpunished, and guarantee that the truth emerges without any institutional bias or cover-up attempts.
Senior Advocate Anand Grover represented the Appellant while Senior AAG Shailesh Madiyal represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Appellant was a police constable, who was posted at the District Police Headquarters, Baramulla, Jammu and Kashmir. In February 2023, he received a signal from the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP), directing him to report to the office of Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) in connection with an enquiry related to a narcotics matter. The Appellant alleged that no sooner he reached the office of SSP, he was detained and subjected to brutal custodial torture for six consecutive days. Allegedly, his genital organs and testicles were amputated, pepper was sprinkled on his private parts, and he was given electric shocks which led to a fracture of his foot. He was first transferred to the District Hospital and then to the Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences (SKIMS), where he was accompanied by the Sub-Inspector.
It was alleged that the Appellant underwent surgery for the injury caused by amputation of his testicles, which had been brought to the hospital in a polythene bag by the said Sub-Inspector. Thereafter, an FIR was registered against the Appellant for the offence under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). When his wife requested for registration of FIR against the police personnel, no action was taken. Aggrieved by the inaction of the authorities, the Appellant filed a Writ Petition before the High Court, which held that at this early stage, it would not be appropriate to quash the FIR, as the investigation was in its infancy and should be allowed to proceed to ascertain the truth. Hence, the Appellant was before the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, said, “… the respondent’s suicide theory is demolished when assessed in light of the medical evidence, which decisively rules out the theory of the harm being self-inflicted. The complete surgical removal of both testicles, the extensive injuries to the appellant’s palms and soles, consistent with custodial torture techniques such as falanga, the presence of multiple vegetative particles in the rectum, and bruising on the buttocks extending to the thighs all points to a pattern of sustained and systematic torture. These injuries are medically impossible to be self-inflicted, particularly in the absence of fatal hemorrhage or loss of consciousness, as would have occurred had the mutilation been self-administered.”
The Court noted that the Respondent’s narrative reveals a disturbing pattern of systematic cover-up and abuse of authority that further strengthens the Appellant’s claim for CBI investigation.
“The majesty of law demands nothing less than complete independence and impartiality in investigating crimes that shock the conscience of society and violate the most fundamental principles of human dignity enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the transfer of investigation to the CBI becomes not merely advisable but constitutionally imperative to ensure justice and uphold the rule of law”, it further said.
The Court observed that this is not merely a case of investigative error or overreach; it is a calculated effort to fabricate charges, distort the narrative, and shield the real perpetrators of crime of custodial torture.
“The use of State machinery to invert the roles of victim and offender represents a grave subversion of the criminal process and compels the intervention of this Court to prevent the miscarriage of justice. … Upon evaluating the present case and the material on record, we find that the High Court gravely erred in declining to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash FIR No. 32 of 2023 and the proceedings arising therefrom. Faced with a clear abuse of process, where a custodial torture victim is falsely implicated to shield the perpetrators, the High Court was duty bound to intervene”, it added.
Conclusion and Directions
The Court reiterated that where fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India are violated by State machinery, appropriate monetary compensation may be an effective remedy.
“The injuries caused to the appellant during his illegal detention, particularly the complete mutilation of his genitalia, use of pepper/chilly powder and electric shocks on his genitalia, are grave reminders of the inhuman torture meted out to the appellant while detaining him illegally. The cumulative effect of all these facts is deeply shocking to the conscience of this Court”, it also remarked.
The Court said that the Appellant, a police constable himself, suffered life-debilitating injuries while in the custody of fellow state actors, and despite repeated complaints, no effective redress was provided.
“… we direct the State to pay interim compensation to the tune of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) to the appellant. This compensation is without prejudice to the appellant’s right to pursue further remedies for additional compensation before appropriate forum. The State Government shall be under an obligation to recover the said amount from the officials found guilty upon completion of the investigation/disciplinary proceedings”, it directed.
Accordingly, the Apex Court allowed the Appeals and quashed the High Court’s Judgment.
Cause Title- Khursheed Ahmad Chohan v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors. Etc. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 876)
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior Advcoate Anand Grover, AOR Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Advocates Ibad Mushtaq, Akanksha Rai, and Gurneet Kaur.
Respondents: Senior AAG Shailesh Madiyal, AOR Pashupathi Nath Razdan, and Advocate Parth Awasthi.