Katakey, J.

This is another instance of an unfortunate death of a young boy, aged about 28 years, because of the torture while in custody of the Indian Army.

2. The undisputed fact, as it appears from the pleadings in the writ petition as well as in the affidavits filed by the Indian Army as well as the State Government, are that the petitioner’s husband was apprehended by the 94 Field Regiment of Indian Army on 31.05.2004 at about 2300 hours, who was in custody of the Army up to 1745 hours of 01.06.2004.

3. The petitioner alleges that while her husband Biswajit Acharjee was in Army custody, he was tortured, as a result of which received both external and internal injuries, for which after his release, though he was admitted in Lumding Railway Hospital, he eventually died on 02.06.2004. The petitioner has also contended that the Indian Army, by exerting pressure has extracted a writing from Ashok Roy, a relative of Biswajit Acharjee, that he was found to be healthy and not subjected to any torture while in Army custody. The petitioner, therefore, prays for a direction for payment of compensation and also for a job.

4. The writ petition filed by the petitioner has been contested by the Indian Army by filing affidavit-in-opposition by the Lieutenant Colonel of 94 Field Regiment, who having admitted the aforesaid facts as narrated relating to the date and time of apprehension and date and time of release, however, has contended that Biswajit Acharjee was never tortured while in Army Custody, who was examined by a doctor in Hojai Civil Hospital on 01.06.2004 at about 1200 hours and was certified to be both physically and mentally fit and no injury was found. It has also been contended that on 01.06.2004 he was produced before the Hojai Police Station, wherefrom he was released in a good condition and Sri Ashok Roy, a relative of Biswajit Acharjee has also given in writing that his physical condition was good at the time of release. In the said affidavit, though the Lieutenant Colonel has stated relating to holding of a Court of enquiry, result of the same has not been disclosed.

5. The State Government has controverted the statements made by the Indian Army in the affidavit-in-opposition filed. The Superintendent of Police, Nagaon, in his affidavit-in-opposition has clearly stated that it was found during enquiry that Biswajit Acharjee was tortured by the Indian Army while he was in their custody. The Superintendent of Police has also stated that though the Indian Army has stated that Biswajit Acharjee was physically produced before the Lumding Police Station on 01.06.2004 at about 1745 hours, he, however, was not physically produced but was kept inside an army vehicle outside the police station and secured the release order from the police without physically presenting him before the police. In the enquiry conducted by the State it was also found that the doctor in Lumding Civil Hospital has issued the certificate on 01.06.2004 relating to the physical condition of Acharjee without examining him. The State, therefore, has not supported the case of the Indian Army as projected in the affidavit relating to the torture of Sri Acharjee while he was in Army custody.

6. We have heard Mr. N. Bora, learned Central Govt. counsel appearing for the Indian Army and Mr. P.S. Deka, learned counsel appearing for the State of Assam. Unfortunately none has appeared for the petitioner, though the names of the learned counsel appearing for her are reflected in the cause list.

7. It has been contended by the learned Central Govt. counsel that it is evident from the stand taken by the Army in the affidavit-in-opposition filed as well as the documents appended thereto that though the Army apprehended Biswajit Acharjee on 01.06.2004 at about 2300 hours and he was released on 02.06.2004 at about 1745 hours, after his production in Lumding Police Station and at that time he was found to be in good condition. The learned counsel referring to the medical