The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the State Government to pay compensation for harassment and brutality inflicted by police officials, as well as the need for disciplinary action and sensitivity in handling cases of custodial violence.

P. Jyothimani, J.

This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 01.076.2006 made in M.P.No.1 of 2006 in W.P.No.24160 of 2006, dismissing the above said petition, the petitioner has preferred the above writ appeal.

2. The Writ Petition No.24160 of 2006, is filed for Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 8 to pay a sum of Rs.10 lakhs as compensation to the petitioner for the death of her brother and also to direct the second respondent, viz., the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, to initiate appropriate disciplinary action against respondents 3 to 8.

3. The case of the petitioner, as seen in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, is that she along with her husband and her brother Pandian were living in Vyasarpadi and the said Pandian, who was aged about 18 years, was working as a helper in the vegetable shop belonging to one Ms.Renuka at New Merginpuram at Vyasarpadi. According to the petitioner, her brother Pandian was having the traits of a woman and later, became a transgender person. By knowing his nature, the third respondent Police has named him as Pandian @ Pottai Pandian in the First Information Report registered in Crime No.614 of 2006.

3 (a). It is the further case of the petitioner that on 01.05.2006 at around 11.00 PM, the police personnel belonging to the third respondent Police Station have come to the house searching for Pandian in the premises stating that one Saranraj had committed theft and to interrogate the same, they wanted to take Pandian and immediately after the whereabouts of the said Saranraj was known, Pandian would be released. It was, based on the said representation, the petitioner has sent her brother Pandian along with the police personnel. The police have produced Pandian along with the said Saranraj before the V Metropolitan Magistrate on 04.05.2006, who has remanded them to judicial custody. On 19.05.2006, her brother was enlarged on bail with condition that he should report before the third respondent, viz., Inspector of Police, P.3 Vyasarpadi Police Station, every day at 10.00 AM. One Police Constable Sampath, the 8th respondent, used to come to the house of the petitioner every day at 8.00 AM and take Pandian to the Police Station and he would be brought back only after 11.00 PM every night. On return, Pandian appeared to be tired and would not take food. It was, on 08.06.2006, when the petitioner insisted the reason, her brother Pandian cried and told her that the police personnel attached to the third respondent Police Station, including respondents 3 to 8 have tortured him and sexually assaulted him every day. When the mother of the petitioner, having come to know about the same, has enquired in the Police Station, she was beaten up.

3 (b). On the said date, viz., on 08.06.2006, when Pandian went to comply with the condition, the 3rd and 4th respondents have threatened that he should not reveal anything to anyone and also threatened that Pandian should not come along with his mother to the Police Station. Therefore, the petitioner used to accompany her brother to the third respondent Police Station. Even on 11.06.2006, the petitioners brother told the petitioner that the police continued the harassment. When the petitioner enquired, 3rd and 4th respondents have abused her and threatened that false cases will be foisted against her, charging her as prostitute.

3 (c). On 12.06.2006, at 8.00 AM, one Anjali Devi, the petitioners sister-in-law, informed her that the petitioners brother had poured kerosene and immolated himself inside the third respondent Police Station and he was taken to the hospital by one Guna. When the petitioner went to Stanley Government General Hospital, Chennai, she was directed to go to Kilpauk Government Medical College Hospital, Chennai and found that her brother was treated for the burn injuries in the Intensive Care Unit. When the petitioner enquired the reason, her brother told her that the Sub-Inspector