Back
2020 Supreme(Mad) 71
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.P. SAHI, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, JJ.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government Department of Home, Chennai & Others - Appellants
Versus
S. Anand & Others - Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 3806 of 2019 & C.M.P. No. 24031 of 2019
Decided On : 21-01-2020
For the Appellants : R. Udaya Kumar, Additional Government Pleader
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code , 1973 - Section 357 – Indian Penal Code , 1863 - Section 324 – Constitution Of India - Article 21 – Article 226 - Human Rights Act - Section 30 - Writ petitioner has filed stating that he had studied Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and was working as Supervisor - Petitioner’s family consist of his widowed mother, younger sister and younger brother - writ petitioner states that though he is a Diploma in Mechanical Engineering he is earning his livelihood by driving a taxi - It is stated in writ petition that his friend one and a girl travelled in his taxi from College bus stand - They alighted and petitioner does not know about their whereabouts - Petitioner states that at about Inspector of Police, Police Station, fifth respondent herein, called him Police Station for enquiry - He was repeatedly slapped in Police Station, stating that his friend had eloped with a rich girl and that he has to tell them about their whereabouts - When petitioner stated that he did not know about their whereabouts, petitioner was beaten till - Petitioner was brought to Police Station, where again, beating continued - petitioner was threatened that unless he reveals where couple had gone, false cases would be foisted - He was kept in Police Station – It is alleged that fifth respondent made petitioner undress himself and he was beaten with a stick - Petitioner’s thumb was tied and bent backwards and petitioner was given beatings on his thumb because of which petitioner was unable to move his thumb - It is also stated that family of petitioner was humiliated by Police when they searched his house - It is also alleged that torture came to an end only, when and girl were traced – Held , If obtaining factual matrix is adjudged on aforesaid principles and parameters, there can be no scintilla of doubt that appellant, a successful scientist having national reputation, has been compelled to undergo immense humiliation - lackadaisical attitude of State Police to arrest anyone and put him in police custody has made appellant to suffer ignominy - Dignity of a person gets shocked when psycho-pathological treatment is meted out to him - A human being cries for justice when he feels that insensible act has crucified his self-respect - That warrants grant of compensation under public law remedy – Court are absolutely conscious that a civil suit has been filed for grant of compensation - That will not debar constitutional court to grant compensation taking recourse to public law - Court cannot lose sight of wrongful imprisonment, malicious prosecution, humiliation and defamation faced by appellant - It is thus now well settled that award of compensation against State is an appropriate and effective remedy for redress of an established infringement of a fundamental right by a public servant - quantum of compensation will, however, depend upon facts and circumstances of each case - Award of such compensation will not come in way of aggrieved person claiming additional compensation in a civil court, in enforcement of private law remedy in tort, nor come in way of criminal court ordering compensation - Writ appeal is dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Subramonium Prasad, J.
(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order passed in W.P.No.15794 of 2003, dated 2/7/2012.)
1. Instant Writ Appeal has been filed by the State of Tamil Nadu, challenging the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.15794 of 2003, awarding a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) to the writ petitioner/first respondent herein, who had suffered torture, bodily injury and humiliation, while in custody.
2. The writ petitioner has filed W.P.No.15794 of 2003 stating that he had studied Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and was working as Supervisor. The petitioner’s family consist of his widowed mother, younger sister and younger brother. The writ petitioner states that though he is a Diploma in Mechanical Engineering he is earning his livelihood by driving a taxi. It is stated in the writ petition that his friend one Pandiyarajan and a girl travelled in his taxi from Fathima College to Cholavandhan bus stand. They alighted and the petitioner does not know about their whereabouts. The petitioner states that at about 8.00 p.m., on 17/4/2003, Mr.M.Kalifulla, Inspector of Police, Samayanallur Police Station, fifth respondent herein, called him to the Kadupatti Police Station for enquiry. He was repeatedly slapped in the Police Station, stating that his friend had eloped with a rich girl and that he has to tell them about their whereabouts. When the petitioner stated that he did not know about their whereabouts, the petitioner was beaten till about 01.30 a.m., on 18/4/2003. The petitioner was brought to the Cholavandan Police Station, where again, the beating continued. The petitioner was threatened that unless he reveals where the couple had gone, false cases would be foisted. He was kept in the Police Station. On 19/4/2003, it is alleged that the fifth respondent made the petitioner undress himself and he was beaten with a stick. The petitioner’s thumb was tied and bent backwards and the petitioner was given beatings on his thumb because of which the petitioner was unable to move his thumb. It is also stated that the family of the petitioner was humiliated by the Police when they searched his house. It is also alleged that the torture came to an end only on 22/4/2003, when Pandiyarajan and the girl were traced.
3. Since the detention of the petitioner was not in accordance with the procedure, telegrams had been sent to the Home Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, the Additional Director General of Police, Human Rights Commission, etc.
4. The petitioner’s mother filed a petition under Section 30 of the Human Rights Act, before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, in C.C.No.6 of 2004. The learned Principal District and Sessions Judge after a detailed hearing, came to a conclusion that the petitioner was subjected to torture in custody. It was found that there was a fracture in the right thumb of the petitioner and he had to undergo a surgery for the same. The Principal District and Sessions Judge found that the fifth respondent herein who was the accused in C.C.No.6 of 2004, was guilty of offence under Section 324 IPC r/w. Section 30 of the Human Rights Act and sentenced the fifth respondent herein to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/- in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment. The Principal District and Sessions Judge directed that out of Rs.4,000/-, Rs.3,500/- was to be paid to the writ petitioner as compensation under Section 357 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The appeal against the said judgment has also been dismissed. The department proceedings initiated against the fifth respondent ended in a punishment of censure deferred for six months.
5. The petitioner filed W.P.No.15794 of 2003 seeking compensation for the custodial torture inflicted on him. The State filed a counter contending that since the petitioner’s mother had already approached the Courts under the Human Rights Act, and since the Principal District and Sessions Judge, ha
