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

2008 Supreme(Mad) 1418

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.P. SHAH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE PRABHA SRIDEVAN
Coimbatore Bar Association a Registered Association rep. its President N. Sundaravadivelu District Court Complex
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary
W.P.No.716 of 2007 & M.P.Nos.1 of 2007, 2, 3 and 4 of 2007
Decided on : 29-04-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: G. Masilamani, AG assisted, Raja Kalifulla, GP,
V.R. Thangavelu, GA, Advocates. For the Respondent: R5, A.S. Vijayaraghavan, R6,
N.A. Ravindran, Advocates.

In the matter of violation of human rights conclusion of Commissioner held acceptable.

Headnote:Torts-Claim for compensation-petition for seeking direction for making payment of compensation to second petitioner/advocate for insult and attack and for violation of human rights-held, human rights of Advocate petitioner violated-held entitled for compensation petition allowed.

Judgment :-

The first petitioner is the Coimbatore Bar Association. The second petitioner is a practising Advocate and a member of the first petitioner Association. The petitioners have moved this writ petition seeking for a mandamus directing the State of Tamil Nadu to pay compensation of Rs.10 lakhs to the second petitioner for the insult and assault and for the violation of human rights committed by respondents 5 to 7 along with other police officials and to take appropriate action against the erring officials.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as follows:-

On 112. 2006 at about 9.20 p.m. the second petitioner had entered the town bus stand to board a bus to reach his home. He and Miss Sathyabama, the fifth respondent (Police Constable) dashed against each other. This resulted in a wordy altercation. According to the second petitioner, he was abused and beaten up by the fifth respondent and about four constables who had gathered there, pushed him down and kicked several times and dragged him to the nearby All Women Police Station (AWPS) and to B.3 Police Station few feet away and beaten up again, even after he had revealed his identity as an Advocate. The police also refused to take up his complaint. Later the second petitioner was taken to the Government Hospital only at 1.45 A.M. the following day and as he was not given proper treatment and there was also an attempt to falsely issue a Drunkenness Certificate (DC) as though he was drunk. The second petitioner went to Kovai Medical Centre where he had earlier undertaken treatment and had undergone surgery for his brain tumor. According to the second petitioner, as a result of this surgery, he has lost his vision in his right eye as well as hearing by his left ear. He had also suffered facial deformity due to paralysis. When he went to Kovai Medical Centre, after this incident a series of investigations was done, a CT scan was also taken, from which it was found that the second petitioner had received multiple bruises and there was a tear in his left ear because of the assault. It is also alleged that in order to suit their convenience, the police also registered a complaint against the second petitioner, as allegedly given by Sathyabama, as if he had outraged her modesty. The second petitioner has alleged that because of the assault, he has been put to severe hardship, especially the artificial instrument implanted in the brain during the earlier surgery was also affected. He suffers severe pain in the spinal region due to the attack and is unable to sit continuously for more than 15 minutes. Even after discharge from the hospital, he was required to take treatment continuously and could not attend to his work for nearly three months. More than Rs.1 lakh has been spent for his medical treatment so far because of this incident. In these circumstances, the second petitioner has claimed compensation for a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs.

3. On behalf of the State Government, a counter affidavit has been filed by the Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore City and separate counter affidavits have been filed by respondents 5, 6 and 7. According to the version of the respondents, the second petitioner was never beaten up by the police either at the bus stand or in the police station. They had not refused to receive any complaint and the giving of the complaint was delayed by the advocates themselves and at the hospital, drunkenness certificate had been written out by mistake by the doctors and was not at all issued. A very small incident had been blown out of proportion immediately after the entry of the Advocates Association and they indulged in provocative conduct and the respondents were put to great disadvantage in not having an Association for themselves. The injuries sustained by the second petitioner were allegedly due to the intervention of the public themselves after seeing his misbehaviour with a uniformed lady police officer. According to the respondents, after the second







































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