The State is responsible for ensuring that there is no infringement of the indefeasible rights of a citizen to life, except in accordance with law while the citizen is in its custody. The precious right guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be denied to convicts, under-trials, or other prisoners in custody, except according to procedure established by law.

N. Surjamani, J.:- This case relates to a claim of a mother about the wrongful and illegal detention of her son Shri Kangujam Ojit Singh, aged about 15 years, a student of Class X and custodial death of her said son in the custody of the respondents coupled with a prayer for issuing an appropriate writ or orders of fixing responsibility for the death of her son after arrest and detention in custody and also for a direction to the respondents to pay adequate compensation to the petitioner for the death of her said son Kangujam Ojit Singh in custody.

2. According to the writ petition, she is illiterate and an unsophisticated woman and a weaver by occupation. Her husband is a driver of private vehicle belonging to other persons and all her issues namely, Shri K. Oken Singh (24 years), Kumari K. Shushila Devi (21 years), Shri K. Ojit Singh (15 years) and Shri K. Rajesh Singh (11 years) are all students and her second son, the said K. Ojit Singh was born on 1 -3-1982 and was a student of Class X of Bashikhong High School during the academic session of 1997-98 and he was the General Secretary of the said school in the year 1996 and a good sportsman.

3. On 16-2-1997, her son K. Ojit Singh, in the afternoon of the day went out for about 30 minutes saying that he would go to the house of his classmate namely N. Kabita Devi of Bashikhong Mamang Leikai which is about 1 km away from the petitioner's house and he would enquire of whether the knitting of his cap by her had been completed or not. Shri Ojit Singh came back to his house. The knitting of his cap had not been completed and, thereafter at about 4 p.m. of the same day, he went again to the house of the said Kabita Devi. At about 5 p.m. of the same day i.e. 1 6-2-1997 the petitioner got the information that her son Ojit Singh was arrested by the Army from the house/compound of the said Kabita Devi at about 4.30 p.m. and that he had been beaten up by the Army personnel at the time of arrest. On the approach of the petitioner and her family members, the local MLA tried his level best to ascertain in the detailed information about the safe custody of Shri Ojit Singh in the hands of the Army by contacting some civil police officers of Imphal District but the Army did not hand over her said son to the police till the early evening of 19-2-1997 nor did they release him at any time earlier since after his arrest on 16-2-1997.

4. But, only on 19-2-1997 at about 4 p.m. she got the information that the Army had once brought her son Ojit Singh earlier to the Singjamei police station some minutes before she got the said information and that, her said son had been taken by the Army personnel to the hospital and the police could not state as to which hospital her said son had been taken. At about 5 p.m. of the same day i.e. 19-2-1997, two gypsy vehicles said to be of the Army were seen entering into the compound of the Singjamei Police Station and soon after those vehicles left the Police Station, the petitioner and her party contacted the police personnel of Singjamei Police Station and they came to know that Shri Ojit Singh had been brought to the Police Station and left at that Police Station.

5. It is also the case of the petitioner that, when her husband called his son by his nick-name "Ibomcha", from nearby the room of the Police Station her husband heard his son's reply, "Baba" in a very low and unusual voice but the Police personnel immediately prevented her husband from calling his son saying that his said son should not be disturbed in any manner and the police asked the parents of the boy to bring some warm clothes and food for him and accordingly, at about 8 p.m. of the same evening of 19-2-97, the parents of the boy brought some clothes and food for him at the Police Station. The petitioner wanted and tried to see and talk with her son but the Police told her to see her son in the morning of the following day and asked her further to let her son rest and not to disturb him in a