Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta, Supreme Court
Authorities Conveniently Tried To Cover Up: Supreme Court Directs State To Pay ₹25L Compensation To Kin Of Man Alleged To Have Died In Police Custody
|The Supreme Court was considering a Special Leave Petition filed by the legal heirs of a man who allegedly died in police custody.
While holding that the facts of the case warranted immediate registration of an FIR and a thorough investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of a man who allegedly sustained multiple injuries during his police custody, which the State authorities deliberately tried to cover up, the Supreme Court has awarded an interim compensation of Rs 25 lakh to the wife and children of the deceased.
The Apex Court was considering a Special Leave Petition filed by the legal heirs of a man who allegedly died in police custody.
The Division Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta held, “Having regard to the age of the injuries noted in the post-mortem report, particularly Injury No. 2, being the laceration on the occipital scalp which was opined to be within one day, and Injuries Nos. 5 and 6 which were opined to be 2 to 6 days old, the possibility of the deceased having sustained these multiple injuries spread over the period of his custody cannot be ruled out. The facts, therefore, clearly warranted immediate registration of an FIR and a thorough investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of Shri Shravan, which, the State authorities conveniently and deliberately tried to cover up. The fact that the post-mortem report was not placed before the High Court and that the relevant material was brought on record only pursuant to the directions issued by this Court further highlights the dilatory approach adopted by the State authorities.”
Advocate Ambuj Tiwari represented the Petitioner while Additional Advocate General Bishwajit Dubey represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The petition was filed by the wife and children of Late Shri Shravan Suryavanshi @ Sarvan Tamre before the Chhattisgarh High Court seeking a direction to the respondent police authorities to grant a compensation amount of Rs 50 lakh to the petitioners for their rehabilitation against the custodial death of the deceased Shravan Suryavanshi @ Sarvan Tamre, who allegedly died after being arrested by the police officials of Police Station Seepat. The deceased was apprehended in connection with an FIR registered under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915. As per the FIR, the deceased was found in possession of three bottles, each having a capacity of 2 litres, containing raw Mahua liquor valued at Rs.1200. The deceased was arrested by the Head Constable and taken to the police station along with the seized articles. Pursuant to his arrest and remand, the deceased was lodged at Central Jail, Bilaspur, from where he was referred to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, owing to deterioration in his health. He passed away while undergoing treatment. The dead body was thereafter sent for postmortem examination.
The High Court held that Shravan was subjected to custodial violence and died as a result thereof. The Court, however, granted a meagre compensation quantified at Rs 1 lakh to the petitioners and overlooked the prayer made for directing action against the officers who were responsible for the custodial death. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed the Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Bench noted that the custodial death of the deceased was inquired into by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, under Section 176 CrPC and the inquiry report was submitted on July 22, 2024. “In this backdrop, the stance of blissful ignorance taken by the senior officers of the State of Chhattisgarh, including the Principal Secretary (Home); the Director General of Police and the Director General (Prisons), is sacrilegious and reflects a disturbing disregard of the statutory procedure governing custodial deaths”, the Bench stated.
As per the Bench, the explanation offered that neither any police action nor any disciplinary action was taken against the persons responsible because the judicial inquiry report had not been served upon the police officials was a cover-up story and an attempt to pull the wool over the Court’s eyes. It was noticed that in the reply filed by the State before the High Court, the State had itself disclosed that the judicial inquiry under Section 176 CrPC had been instituted and that the inquiry report was awaited. “The said reply, therefore, clearly establishes that the State authorities were conscious of the judicial inquiry into the custodial death and were awaiting its outcome”, it added.
Holding that the possibility of the deceased having sustained multiple injuries spread over the period of his custody couldnot be ruled out, the Bench asked the Director, CBI, to forthwith ensure registration of a regular criminal case in relation to the custodial death of Shravan.
Considering that the finding recorded by the High Court that the deceased was the sole breadwinner of his family who died an unnatural death on account of violence suffered during the period of his custody was not disputed by the State, the Bench, as an interim measure, directed that compensation to the tune of Rs 25 lakh should be paid by the State of Chhattisgarh to the petitioners. “The final quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners shall be determined while adjudicating the instant petition”, it ordered.
Cause Title: Lahra Bai Tamre v. State of Chattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 840)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Ambuj Tiwari, AOR Nupur Kumar
Respondent: Additional Advocate General Bishwajit Dubey, Advocate Vinayak Sharma, AOR Ravinder Kumar Yadav, Advocate Yashvardhan Shah