SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SC) 850

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Hansura Bai & Anr. – Appellants
VERSUS
The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No(s). of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No (s). 3450 of 2025)
Decided On : 15-05-2025

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Payoshi Roy, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha, Adv. Mr. S. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv. Ms. Nikita Sonavane, Adv. Mr. Sagar Soni, Adv. Ms. Maheshwari Mawase, Adv. Ms. Madhvi Gomathieswaran, Adv. Mr. Bharathimohan M., Adv. Mr. Avinash Kumar, Adv. Ms. V. Swetha, Adv. Mr. Vairawan A.s, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, A.A.G. Ms. Radhika, Adv. Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela, AOR Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Ms. Saloni, Adv. Mr. Arpit Garg, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shikhar Goel, Adv. Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR Mr. Shivam Gaur, Adv. Mr. Nitin Sharma, Adv.

The court emphasized the need for independent investigation by CBI in custodial death cases involving police officers to ensure credibility, public trust, and witness protection.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 380 and 457 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 105, 115(2), 3(5), 120 - Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Custodial death investigation - Court ensured transfer of investigation to CBI due to serious doubts regarding local police credibility given their involvement in the matter. (Paras 25-31)

(B) Legal principles on investigation integrity - Fair and impartial investigation must occur under an independent agency if local police are involved in the allegations. (Paras 25-30)

(C) Witness protection concerns - The court highlighted the necessity of protecting the sole eye-witness to the custodial death amid threats and coercion. (Paras 24, 35)

Facts of the case:
The appellants challenged the High Court's refusal to transfer investigation of custodial death allegations against police officials and demanded bail for the eye-witness, citing threats and undue influence. (Paras 3-6, 13-18)

Findings of Court:
Supreme Court directed case transfer to CBI for unbiased investigation, asserting local police bias and the need for witness protection. (Paras 31-34)

Issues: Was the investigation by local police impartial? Should it be transferred to CBI? Is adequate protection for the sole witness necessary? (Paras 25-30)

Ratio Decidendi: Court maintained that investigations must be credible and should not be conducted by agencies privy to allegations; ensuring public trust necessitates transfer of investigations and witness protection measures. (Paras 25-31)

Result: Appeal disposed of with orders for CBI investigation and witness protection.

Table of Content
1. custodial death details and abuse by police (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. post-mortem outcome and fir registration (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. writ petition for investigation transfer (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
4. arguments for cbi investigation and bail (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
5. need for independent investigation (Para 25 , 28 , 29 , 30)
6. order for cbi investigation transfer (Para 31 , 32)
7. bail considerations and witness protection (Para 33 , 34 , 36)
8. court's directive for cbi investigation and witness protection. (Para 35)
9. conclusion and disposal of appeal (Para 37 , 38)

JUDGMENT

Mehta, J.

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellants herein have approached this Court, through this appeal by special leave, assailing the judgment dated 20th December, 2024, passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior [Hereinafter, being referred to as the ‘High Court’] in Writ Petition No. 33416 of 2024, whereby the learned Single Judge turned down the prayer made by the appellants for transferring the investigation into the custodial death of Deva Pardhi to some other investigating agency; and to direct the release of sole eye-witness to the custodial torture, namely, Gangaram Pardhi on bail.

4. Facts as emerging from the record reveal that one Bhagwan Singh, resident of Village Bhidra, lodged an FIR No. 232 of 2024 at Myana Police Station against unknown persons for theft and house trespass by night punishable under Sections 380 and

457 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 [For short, ‘IPC’]. As per the complainant, substantial articles of silver and gold jewellery and cash were stolen from the safe of his house on 2nd June, 2024. The FIR of the said incident came to be registered on 3rd June, 2024.

5. The appellants are mother and aunt respectively of Deva Pardhi, whose marriage was scheduled to be solemnised on 14th July, 2024 with one Nikita Pardhi. It is the case of the appellants that while the Haldi ritual was going on, about 30-40 police personnel entered the wedding venue in 5-6 police cars and two motorcycles. The time was around 04:00 P.M. to 04:30 P.M., when 10 police officials entered into Deva Pardhi’s house and immediately overpowered and handcuffed him along with his uncle, Gangaram Pardhi, the husband of appellant No. 2, and started assaulting both of them. The remaining members of the police team surrounded the house. When the family members, including women and children, tried to resist/oppose the high-handed acts of the errant police officials, they too were manhandled and beaten up. Deva Pardhi and Gangaram Pardhi were dragged by the police officials and were forcibly taken away in the police van to the Jhagar Chowki. The family members were told that they would be taken to Myana Police Station for inquiry in the aforesaid theft case. The police officials further assured that both Deva Pardhi and Gangaram Pardhi would be safely brought back by the next morning. It is alleged that the police officials took Deva Pardhi and Gangaram Pardhi to the old Thana instead of the new Thana premises which has CCTV facilities. Women folk from both the households visited the police station, but they were not allowed to meet and speak to Deva Pardhi and Gangaram Pardhi.

6. Both Deva Pardhi and Gangaram Pardhi were threatened and were subjected to intense third- degree treatment including beating by ropes, putting chilly powder, petrol, salt and hot water on their bodies. Deva Pardhi was strung up by ropes and was hung upside down from the roof. His face was covered with a black cloth which was tied to his ankle using a string. He was repeatedly doused with water in an attempt to suffocate him. By putting Deva Pardhi in fear of death, the police officials pressurized him to confess to the commission of theft as reported by Bhagwan Singh. Gangaram Pardhi tried to intervene saying that they did not have any idea about the so- called theft. Deva Pardhi was tortured in this manner for about three hours whereafter the rope was cut. Resulta

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top