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

1997 Supreme(Gau) 137

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
J.N.Sarma, J.
Hemchandra Kalita -Appellant
Versus
State of Assam -Respondent
Civil Rule No. 2622 of 1995
Decided On : 06-08-1997

Advocates Appeared:
K.H.Choudhary, Kumar Dipak Das, J.M.Choudhary, N.Zaman

The central legal point established in the judgment is the state's obligation to protect personal liberty, dignity, and human rights, and the appropriateness of compensation as a remedy for fundamental rights violations.

Headnote:

Compensation - Police Brutality - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 41, 46, 49, 50, 56, 57, 167 - Article 21, 22, 20(3) of the Constitution of India - Universal Declaration Human Rights, 1948 - [SUMMARY]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a writ application claiming compensation for the killing of his brother by police personnel. The deceased was a member of a banned organization and was shot and killed by the police. The petitioner alleged that the killing violated human rights and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the deceased died due to injuries sustained from police firing, unjustified assault, inhuman treatment, and negligence in providing medical attention. The court accepted the report of the learned District Judge, which highlighted the suspicious manipulation of the General Diary by the police.

Issues: The main issues were whether the police's actions were justified, the authenticity of the General Diary, and the responsibility of the police in the death of the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and various constitutional provisions to emphasize the protection of personal liberty, dignity, and human rights. It also cited previous judgments to establish the state's vicarious liability for fundamental rights violations and the appropriateness of compensation as a remedy.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ application and directed the authorities to pay a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 as compensation to the deceased's parents within six months.

This writ application has been filed claiming compensation, for killing one Dulal Kalita (the brother of the petitioner) by the police personnel on 23.5.95 at Village Mathpara under Ghhay gaon Police Station. Dulal Kalita was a graduate and he was studying LLB at Goalpara College. He was aged about 28 years at the time of death. At the time of his death he left his old parents and other members of the family including the petitioner. It is stated in this writ application that Dulal Kalita was killed by the police personnel in a brutal manner and it is stated that it is a cold blooded murder and it is further stated that after Dulal Kalita was injured at the police firing no adequate treatment was given and as a result Dulal Kalita died. It is alleged that the killing of Dulal Kalita is in violation of human rights and it is also violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Two prayers have been made in this writ application :

(i) To appoint a Commission of inquiry under the appropriate Act and to hold an inquiry into the incident of killing of Dulal Kalita

(ii) To pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000 (five lakhs) to the members of the family of deceased Dulal Kalita as compensation for the brutal killing of Dulal Kalita by police personnel.

2. At the time of argument the prayer No. 1 was not pressed and accordingly I am not considering that aspect of the matter. The learned District Judge, Kamrup at Gu wahati was asked to hold an inquiry and accordingly the inquiry report was submitted on 17th of May/96 by the learned District Judge. The following witnesses were examined : PW 1, Dr. H. Medhi, PW 2 Shri Ratna Mahanta, PW 3 Shri Nripen Das, PW 4 Shri Dinesh Das, PW 5 Shri Nagen Das, PW 6 Nagen Sarma, PW 7 Ghitra Das, PW 8 Shri Hem Chandra-Kalita (the petitioner) h PW 9 Dr. R. Thengal and PW 10 Dr. HK Mahanta, DW1 Taiyab Ali Gaonburah, DW 2 Shri Surya Kanta Das, DW 3 Babul ChandrasDas, DW 4 Deepak Basumatary, DW 5 Tosheswar Phukan, DW 6 Asgar Ali; DW 7 Pabitra Kumar Baishya, DW 8 Shri Udo Kumar Baruah, DW 9, Faziul Haque Khan, and DW 10 Dr. AK Sinha. One registered expert was examined by the Court as Court witness. A number of documents were exhibited before the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge in paragraph 5 of the report found as follows:

“5. It is undisputed fact that Dulal Kalita died on 23.5.95 as a result of multiple injuries including a shot injury sustained by him. PW10 Dr. HK Mahanta performing the autopsy on the dead body has found 3 injuries on the left leg caused by rifle firearm and 17 other injuries caused by blunt weapons. The blunt weapon injuries are abrasions and bruises spread over the right elbow, back of left side of chest and neck, back of bom sides of abdomen, back of pelvis, middle of left arm, back of right hand, chin and cheek with extensive haemorrhage into the tissues and muscles mostly on the left side of the chest and abdomen and the pelvic wall. There was also fracture of the 9th rib on the left side. According to the doctor all the injuries were ante mortem and the death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from the injuries. He has also stated that the extensive haemorrhage on the tissues and muscles of the chest, pelvis and abdominal walls could alone cause the death independent of the leg injury.”

3. It is an admitted position that Dual Kalita was a member of ULFA, a banned organisation and it is also admitted that he was the President of the Kamrup District Committee of ULFA. It is also an admitted position that Dulal Kalita along with Ramani Kalita, the Secretary of Kamrup Unit of ULFA was speeding away in a Motor Cycle and when the police asked to stop them, they did not stop and the police chased them. Thereafter they kept the Motor Cycle by the side of the road and tried to run away, but at that time also police was chasing mem. Ramani Kalita could not be apprehended. But Dulal Kalita according to the police version was apprehended and he was shot at not by police but by hi






















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