Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Sanjay Karol, S. Kumar, JJ.
Sumit Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 333 of 2020
Decided On : 22-12-2020
TORTURE - CUSTODIAL DETENTION AND/OR DEATH - Torture involves not only physical suffering but also mental agony. It is violation of human dignity and destructive of human personality under Articles 21, 22 and 32 - Custodial Violence - Torture/rape, death in police custody/lock-up infringes Article 21 as well as basic human rights. State terrorism is no answer to terrorism. [ D.K. Basu (supra)]
Fact of the Case:
Truck drivers in our country are amongst the most vulnerable sections of our society. The backbone of the national economy is dependent upon the untiring and ever driving efforts and labour of the poor, mostly illiterate and the vulnerable. In the absence of the hard work and toil of truck drivers, economic activity throughout the country is bound to come to a standstill. Truck drivers lack proper education; proper healthcare; face daily hardships; have strained and unstable personal relationships; and most importantly are most susceptible to be at odds with the law and the functionaries of the State. These individuals are under the constant, endless pressure to make ends meet and ensure the survival of their families. It is these vulnerabilities that make them prone to derelictions of the "dark side of human civilization."
Finding of the Court:
The facts of the instant case indicate a grim state of affairs where the police officials have acted in contravention and violation of the procedure established by law. The vehicle and detenue were detained and kept in police custody for more than 35 days without either filing of FIR or following any other procedure of arrest prescribed in law, ensuring constitutional protections to all persons. Even if the version of the Police of the detenue being in the vehicle of his own volition is to be believed, then also the documents annexed along with the affidavit filed by the DGP do record that at least for two days, he was kept in the police lock up. A further version of he being in the compound of the Police station is wholly unplausible, hence unacceptable.
Issues: 1. Whether the police officials acted in contravention and violation of the procedure established by law? 2. Whether the vehicle and detenue were detained and kept in police custody for more than 35 days without either filing of FIR or following any other procedure of arrest prescribed in law? 3. Whether the version of the Police of the detenue being in the vehicle of his own volition is to be believed?
Ratio Decidendi: The procedure required to be followed for the detention and seizure of vehicles is adequately prescribed under the statutory provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 along with the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 102 of Cr.P.C empowers the police officer to seize any property which may be alleged or suspected to be stolen or which is found under the circumstances creating suspicion of the commission of any offense. Section 207 of the Motor Vehicle Act empowers any police officer authorized on behalf of the State Government to seize or detain a vehicle if it is found to be in contravention of section 3, 4, 39, or sub-section (1) of section 66 of the Act. The procedure described under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is relevant. Clearly, seizure of the property made by the police officer ought to be reported to the Magistrate, who has the discretion to pass an order disposing off the property to the person entitled to its possession.
Final Decision: The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Interlocutory application, if any, shall stand disposed of. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna for the needful.
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Karol, C.J. - Torture, either mental or physical, represents the worst violations of individual human personality, an outright and premeditated attack on human dignity. It has no place in the governance of the State and its legitimate use of force. In any democracy, the right to live with dignity and self-worth, cannot be violently defiled within the ambit of Rule of Law and good governance.
2. Truck drivers in our country are amongst the most vulnerable sections of our society. The backbone of the national economy is dependent upon the untiring and ever driving efforts and labour of the poor, mostly illiterate and the vulnerable. In the absence of the hard work and toil of truck drivers, economic activity throughout the country is bound to come to a standstill.
3. Truck drivers lack proper education; proper healthcare; face daily hardships; have strained and unstable personal relationships; and most importantly are most susceptible to be at odds with the law and the functionaries of the State. These individuals are under the constant, endless pressure to make ends meet and ensure the survival of their families. It is these vulnerabilities that make them prone to derelictions of the "dark side of human civilization."
4. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, (1997) AIR SC 610, has observed that "12. In all custodial crimes what is of real concern is not only infliction of body pain but the mental agony which a person undergoes within the four walls of police station or lock-up. Whether it is physical assault or rape in police custody, the extent of trauma, a person experiences is beyond the purview of law." (emphasis supplied)
5. Truck drivers are faced with a great deal of high stress and pressure as part of their job. The introduction of the additional hassle and trauma, perpetuated by the authorities, through the use of hostility and torture is akin to grave human injustice. Such practices are a clear violation of the human rights guaranteed to every citizen of the world. With the failure of the State to protect its citizens, it becomes the responsibility and duty of the Judiciary to intervene in aid of these most downtrodden and helpless individuals.
6. All these issues arise for consideration in the present petition.
7. According to the petitioner, since 29th April, 2020, the Police officials of Parsa Police Station, District- Saran illegally detained his vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-55P-5954 along with its driver, namely, Jitendra Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar (referred to as the detenue), and consequently, sought- (a) release of the vehicle; (b) release of the driver (detenue); (c) adequate compensation for such illegal detention.
8. This Court issued a notice on 3rd June 2020 and based on response filed and submissions made, on 4th June 2020, passed the following order:-
"04.06.2020 Through a WhatsApp message Shri Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned Assistant counsel to learned Advocate General, has forwarded the report prepared by the police officer of Parsa Police Station, in the District of Saran. According to the Police, the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No.HR-55P-5954, namely, Jitendra Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar, was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and after hurting a pedestrian, he fled away from the spot with the vehicle. The said vehicle intercepted by the police officials of Dariyapur Police Station District- Saran, who in turn handed over the Driver and the Vehicle to the Police Officials of Parsa Police Station, District-Saran. According to the report, the driver of the vehicle was not detained. The report also reveals that now an F.I.R. dated 3.6.2020 stands registered at the Parsa Police Station under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code.
During the course of hearing, Shri Prabhu Narayan Sharma, learned Assistant Counsel to learned Advocate General, under instructions from the officer(s) of concerned police station, states that the driver of the
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
