The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of safeguarding fundamental rights, the need for a transparent and accountable process in cases of arrest and detention, and the court's authority to direct a thorough investigation by the C.B.I. to uncover the truth about custodial murders.

C.S. Rajan, J.

The ghost of Varghese who met his tragic end in an alleged encounter with the Police 28 years back is still haunting the people of the State. The startling revelations of the additional 5th respondent (in O.P. No. 21142/98) who is are tired Police Constable that he shot Varghese compelled by his superior Officers stirred up the hornets' nest and these Original Petitions are the out come of those self-styled confessions of the Police Constable. All these Original Petitions (except O.P. No. 22485/98 filed by the kith and kin of Varghese) are Public Interest Litigations. The prayers in these original Petitions are:

(1) for a direction to the Government to conduct "a confidence inspiring threadbare investigation" into the custodial murder of Varghese and to book the culprits and launch prosecution against them; and

(2) to pay compensation to the kith, and kin of late Varghese to the tune of Rs. 10 lakhs. After issuing notice to the State, the learned Additional Advocate General fairly submitted that the Government have no objection in ordering any kind of enquiry into the circumstances and causes of the death of Varghese. It was also submitted by the learned Additional Advocate General that the Government is taking steps to get a judicial officer appointed for a judicial enquiry. Sri. P. Balagangadhara Menon, learned Senior counsel appearing in O.P. No. 224885/98 for the relatives of Varghese submitted that his clients are satisfied with the proposed enquiry under the Commission of Enquiries Act 1952. It was further submitted that the relatives of Varghese are not interested in getting compensation from the State

2. Sri. A.X. Varghese, learned counsel for the petitioner in O.P. No. 21142/98 with his usual forensic flavour and forthrightness strongly urged that an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.) is absolutely necessary to bring out the truth about the custodial murder of Varghese.

3. Sri. K.S. Madhusoodanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in O.P. No. 21463/98 also requested this Court to direct the C.B.I, to treat the counter affidavit filed by the additional 5th respondent as the First Information Statement and to lodge F.I.R. in the above case.

4. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights identifies several rights as basic human rights which are inalienable. The Declaration affirms that all human be is are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. The two rights which are relevant to decide ;his case are (1) right to protection from arbitrary arrest or detention and (2) right to' if , liberty and security of persons.

5. The provisions of human rights are made an integral part of the Indian Constitution. Art.21 of our Constitution which states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law is hailed as a most productive cardinal safeguard in the Constitution for the protection of human rights.

6. The Supreme Court had dealt with the above aspect in a number of decisions. Suffice to mention two landmark judgments of the Supreme Court viz., Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (AIR 1993 SC 1960) and D.K. Basu v. State of 'West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416).

7. In Nilabati Behera's case, Suman Behera, son of Nilabati Behera was taken from his home in Police custody in connection with the investigation of an offence of theft and was detained at the Police Station. On the next day, it came to the notice of Nilabati Behera that the dead body of her son was found on the Railway track. There were multiple injuries on the body of Suman Behera. The Police as usual put forward the story of escape from police custody and committing suicide thereafter. But on enquiry by the District Judge as directed by the Supreme Court it was found that Suman Behera died on account of multiple injuries inflicted on him while he was in Police custody in the Police Station.