JUDGMENT :

T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.

1. There are two writ petitions; one filed by a public interest litigant, Arijit Adhikary and the other is a suo motu writ petition entertained by this Court.

2. The matter concerns the unnatural death of a teenager in the Mallarpur Police Station, District – Birbhum. Various orders have been passed from time to time and affidavits have been filed by the Assistant Director of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, Chairperson, West Bengal Commission for Protection of Child Rights and the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Birbhum. Apart from that, a factual report has also been submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Home and Hill Affairs Department. On going through the reports and the factual matrix, we find that there is a sorry state of affairs in which a young boy of 15 years died in police custody.

3. There are two aspects, which are being pointed out in both the writ petitions. Firstly, as to how the police officers have to be sensitised and what are the directions, which need to be issued to them. The second aspect is with regard to the payment of compensation to the family of the victim boy. We take up the second issue first.

4. The affidavit filed on behalf of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights gives an indication as to how the monetary relief has to be computed in cases of death in police custody. The NHRC in October, 2021 has made certain recommendations regarding monetary relief to various nature of incidents and with regard to custodial death (police). The amount of compensation recommended is Rs.6 lakhs.

5. The learned Advocate General has submitted that the policemen, who were stationed in the said police station as well as the volunteers have been proceeded against and disciplinary action had been initiated against the police officers and order of punishment has also been issued. But, however, it appears that the order of punishment is stoppage of annual increment for a period of one year, which, in our opinion, was thoroughly inadequate considering the gravity of the charge.

6. The father of the victim boy is said to have been offered a temporary job in a panchayat and the family is living below the poverty line. Thus, considering all the aspects, we are of the view that a sum of Rs.15 lakhs shall be paid as compensation to the family of the victim boy. This amount has been quantified by us by taking note of various factors including the fact that the recommendation of NHRC recommending Rs.6 lakhs monetary relief for custodial death (police) was in the year 2021 and compensation is being ordered by this Court in 2023.

7. Thus, we direct the Government of West Bengal to pay a sum of Rs.15 lakhs to the family of the victim boy within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the server copy of this judgment and order.

8. The other aspect of the matter is as to what directions are required to be issued to sensitize the police authorities so that such incidents should not recur. We find that the prayer sought for in WPA(P) 9 of 2020 are just and proper and the directions sought for are to be granted as such.

9. The learned advocate for the said writ petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court the relevant rules framed by the State Government viz. the West Bengal Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2017 (for brevity ‘said Rules’). Rule 8 in Chapter-III of the said Rules deals with the procedure in relation to children in conflict with law. The said Rule clearly enumerates as to what steps are to be taken and what should not be done when a child is apprehended on the alleged ground that he or she is in conflict with law. In terms of sub-rule (1) of rule 8, no first information report shall be registered except where a heinous offence is alleged to have been committed by the child, when such offence is alleged to have been committed jointly with adults. In all other matters, t