Supreme Court of India
HARJIT SINGH BEDI & J.M. PANCHAL
K.H. Shekarappa & Others
Versus
State of Karnataka
Appeal (Crl.) 382 of 2003
Decided on: 03-12-2009
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 304 Part II - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 161 - Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 106 – inquiry – punishments - several constitutional and statutory provisions have been enacted to safeguard the personal liberty and life of citizens incidents of torture and death in the police custody are ever on rise - In spite of condemnation of such acts by this Court and High Courts certain police officials conduct themselves in a manner resulting into gruesome torture and death of suspects in the police custody - There is no manner doubt that these are the most heinous crimes committed by persons who claim to be the protectors of the citizens - What is distressing to note is that incidents of torture and death in the police custody take place the shield of uniform and authority in four walls of police station in the lock-up where victims are totally helpless - This one such case which brings to light an incident in which two persons lost their lives and others were injured while in police custody emerging from the record of case –Held, Appellants had asked him to wipe blood oozing out from injuries and he had accordingly wiped blood trickling out from wounds - According to him when he had gone to wipe blood seeping out from the wounds of Gurumurthy he had felt that was not breathing - According to him he had tried to hold head but the head was slumping on either side - witness has further stated that thereupon he had asked the accused see as what had happened and accused had told him that was pretending and then took lotti from other accused persons and started beating on leg did not show any sign of pain or movement - According to this witness thereafter accused had checked as to whether was dead and asked the appellants to remove his handcuff and untie from stone pillar Medical Officers who had performed autopsy on dead bodies of two deceased would indicate that both the deceased were brought dead to the hospital - When the deceased who were brought to the Police Station were alive and were produced dead before Medical officer, it is for the appellants to explain as to in which circumstances they had died - Deceased were in custody of the appellants who were police officials. During the time when they were in police custody they had expired - Therefore was within the special knowledge of appellants as to how they had expired. In view of the salutary provisions of Section Evidence Act it was for appellants to offer explanation regarding death of the two deceased - As noticed earlier appellants in their further statements stated that both deceased had sustained injuries when they had made attempt flee when their arrest was attempted to be effected - On preponderance of probabilities it difficult to agree with defence pleaded by appellants - Appeal dismissed
Judgment
J.M. PANCHAL, J.
1. The appellants, who were original accused Nos. 1 to 7 and 9, were members of police force of the Doddapet Police Station at Shimoga City, Karnataka. The challenge in this appeal by special leave is to judgment dated November 14, 2002, rendered by the Division Bench of High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore, in Criminal Appeal No. 455 of 1995, by which judgment dated July 28, 1995, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in Sessions Case No. 14 of 1998 convicting them under Sections 143, 148, 326, 201, 218 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and imposing different punishments for commission of those offences, is set aside and instead they are convicted for the offences punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC read with Section 34 IPC for having caused the death of two persons, i.e., Rajakumar and Gurumurthy and under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC for causing hurt to injured Prakash and each one of them is imposed sentence of R.I. for one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo R.I. for 2 years for commission of offence punishable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC whereas no separate sentence is awarded for conviction under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC.
2. Though several constitutional and statutory provisions have been enacted to safeguard the personal liberty and life of citizens, incidents of torture and death in the police custody are ever on the rise. In spite of condemnation of such acts by this Court and High Courts, certain police officials conduct themselves in a manner resulting into gruesome torture and death of suspects in the police custody. There is no manner of doubt that these are the most heinous crimes committed by persons, who claim to be the protectors of the citizens. What is distressing to note is that the incidents of torture and death in the police custody take place under the shield of uniform and authority, in the four walls of a police station or in the lock-up, where the victims are totally helpless.
3. This is one such case which brings to light an incident in which two persons lost their lives and others were injured while in police custody. The facts emerging from the record of the case are as under:
On the night of December 31, 1987, a fight broke out between Gurumurthy, Rajakumar, Prakash, Nallakumar and Purushotham on one hand and some engineering students on the other, at a liquor bar, called Shilpa Bar, at Shimoga, where all were merrymaking to welcome the new year of 1988. The students lodged a complaint of assault on them. Therefore, criminal cases were registered against Gurumurthy, Rajakumar, Nallakumar, Prakash and Purushotham at Doddapet Police Station, Shimoga City. In wee hours of January 12, 1988 a reliable information was received at the said Police Station that Gurumurthy, Rajakumar, Nallakumar, Prakash and Purushotham were taking shelter in a room at Sujatha Building, Tilak Nagar, Shimoga. The appellants Nos. 1 to 7, who were Police Constables, rushed to the place. They apprehended and brought Gurumurthy and others to the Police Station. At the relevant time, the appellant No. 8 was the Head Constable and was present in the Police Station. The appellants gave Gurumurthy, Rajakumar, Nallakumar, Prakash and Purushotham severe beating. Unable to withstand the same Gurumurthy and Rajakumar lost their consciousness and collapsed in the Police Station. The appellants thereafter took both of them to the hospital at different times. But doctor on duty declared them "dead on arrival". Prakash and Nallakumar were also severely beaten and they received serious injuries. Therefore, they were also taken to the hospital. When the news of death of Gurumurthy and Rajakumar at the hands of the police spread, a public disturbance near the hospital took place. On coming to know about this incident, Varadaraj, who was another P.S.I. of the same Police Station, rushed to the hospital and recor
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.