Custodial Torture Allegations Dismissed by Punjab & Haryana High Court Following Detailed Medical Review of FIR 16 Accused

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the alleged custodial death of one Ankit, who passed away while in judicial custody. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal, presiding over the matter, ruled that there was no material evidence on record to support claims of police torture, noting that the deceased’s death resulted from chronic pre-existing medical conditions.

The Allegations: A Grandfather's Quest for Justice

The petitioner, Arjun Singh, had approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus, alleging that his grandson, Ankit, was forcibly picked up by police officials and subjected to torture while in custody. The petitioner claimed that requests for medical attention—specifically an MRI scan—were ignored by the police, and that the family was pressured during the investigation. Following Ankit’s death on September 28, 2020, at the PGIMS, Rohtak, the family demanded a criminal case be registered against the concerned officials, citing human rights violations.

The State’s Defense: Evidence of Chronic Illness

In its response, the State of Haryana contested the allegations, detailing the criminal history of the deceased. Ankit had been named in three separate FIRs, including FIR No. 16 dated January 19, 2019, under Sections 148, 149, 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Arms Act.

The State provided medical documents confirming that Ankit had been diagnosed with hepatitis and a seizure disorder. According to the state’s account, Ankit was admitted to the Civil Hospital in Kaithal and subsequently referred to PGIMS, Rohtak, due to his deteriorating health. The authorities maintained that the arrest occurred according to due process and that the postmortem, conducted on September 29, 2020, was videographed to ensure transparency.

Court Findings: A Data-Driven Analysis

The High Court conducted a minute examination of the medical records submitted by the hospital. The death summary noted that Ankit was suffering from "HCV+ with Seizure d/o with Aspiration pneumonia." The Court observed that despite his critical condition, the patient was receiving treatment, and his poor prognosis had been communicated to the police as well as his family members, including his uncle, Madan Lal.

The postmortem report further clarified the cause of death as "chronic pathology of multiple organs... which is aggravated by hepatitis." The Court noted that the petitioner failed to provide any evidence to counter the extensive medical documentation provided by the State.

Key Observations

The judgment clarifies the court’s reliance on objective medical evidence in cases of alleged custodial abuse:

• "A minute examination of the record shows that on 23.09.2020, poor prognosis of the patient was explained to his uncle, Madan Lal who acknowledged the failing health condition of Ankit."
• "An analysis of the material brought on record shows that the Ankit’s death had taken place while undergoing treatment due to hepatitis and seizure disorder."
• "There is no material on record to show that the petitioner was subjected to custodial torture."
• "The allegations levelled by the petitioner against the respondents are unfounded."

Final Decision

Concluding that the petition lacked merit, Justice Suvir Sehgal dismissed the case, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the claims of police misconduct. The Court determined that the death was the unfortunate outcome of pre-existing chronic health conditions, rather than any violation of custodial rights. The ruling reinforces a precedent where courts prioritize documented medical consensus when adjudicating claims of custodial death against law enforcement agencies.