2012 (1) OLR 597
ORISSA HIGH COURT (CUTTACK)
V.GOPALA GOWDA, CJ & S.K.MISHRA, J.
BANALATA DASH …….Petitioner.
Vrs.
STATE OF ORISSA & ORS. ……Opp.Parties.
W.P.(C) NO. 148 OF 2003
Decided On : 13.01.2012
Custodial Death - Custodial Death - [NILABATI BEHERA (SMT) @ LALITA BEHERA (THROUGH THE SUPREME COURT LEGAL AID COMMITTEE) VS. STATE OF ORISSA, (1993) 2 SCCs 746, People’s Union for Civil Liberties, vs. Union of India and another, AIR 1997 SC 1203, Ahalya Pradhan vs. State of Orissa, 2009 (I) OLR -526] - The court discussed the custodial death of the deceased and the responsibility of the authorities, citing legal provisions and interpretations from previous cases. It emphasized the duty of the jail authorities to ensure safety and security of the inmates and the award of compensation as part of legal consequences of contravention of fundamental rights.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought CBI investigation and compensation for the custodial death of her son. The deceased was declared dead while in custody, and the authorities claimed it to be a suicide. The petitioner alleged foul play and filed a writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the investigation did not reveal the correct picture and concluded it to be a case of custodial death. It held the authorities responsible and awarded compensation to the petitioner.
Issues: The determination of whether the death was a custodial death and whether the State should be directed to pay compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the duty of the jail authorities to ensure safety and security of the inmates and cited legal provisions from previous cases to justify the award of compensation for contravention of fundamental rights.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, directed the State to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000 to the petitioner along with interest, and emphasized the duty of the jail authorities to ensure safety and security of the inmates.
JUDGMENT
S.K.MISHRA, J. The petitioner, mother of the deceased-Smruti Ranjan Das @ Papu, has filed this writ petition seeking directions from the Court to handover investigation of the custodial death of her son to CBI for independent and fair investigation and direct the State to give adequate compensation to her for the death of her son.
2. The petitioner’s son, Smruti Ranjan Das, was arrested on 05.09.2001 in connection with G.R. Case No.1408 of 2000 and was forwarded to the Choudwar Circle Jail on 06.09.2001, vide Admission No.3455 of 2001. While the said Smruti Ranjan Das was in Choudwar Jail under the supervision and control of the Choudwar Jail authorities, he was declared dead on 02.12.2001. On receiving the information, the petitioner and others went to Choudwar Jail and were informed that the dead body of the deceased has been sent for post-mortem examination to the S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack. In S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, she requested the authorities to see the dead body but she was not allowed to see dead body before the post-mortem was conducted. After conducting post-mortem examination the authorities handed over the dead body of the deceased to the petitioner. The petitioner could notice that the deceased has sustained injuries on his body.
The petitioner further plead that this matter was reported in different newspaper leaving it to be cold blooded murder. The petitioner approached higher authorities for impartial investigation regarding the death of her son but she was informed that her son Smruti Ranjan Das had committed suicide. Therefore, she finding no other alternative filed this writ petition.
3. Notice has been issued to the opposite parties but no affidavit has been filed by the Secretary to Government, Home Department. The opposite party no.3, Superintendent of Choudwar Jail, has filed a counter affidavit. No post-mortem report has been attached to the same. The Superintendent admitted that the petitioner’s son was admitted to Choudwar Jail in connection with the aforesaid G.R. Case. It is further pleaded that the deceased had committed suicide inside jail on 02.12.2001 and was not murdered. The Superintendent pleaded that if the any of the inmate desires to committee suicide. It is difficult to prevent him that too in course of mentally depressed as happened in the present case.
4. On such pleadings, in this case, two important questions arise for determination. First, whether the death of the deceased was custodial death and secondly, whether the State should be directed to pay compensation to the petitioner because of the death of the deceased.
5. As seen above, in the counter affidavit the opposite parties have not filed the post-mortem report. In course of hearing, the learned Government Advocate, however, produced a copy thereof, which shows that the doctor, who conducted post-mortem examination, have opined that it to be a case of suicidal hanging. It is further apparent from the post-mortem report that Dr. Sarabana Kumar Naik and Dr. Braja Kishore Dash have conducted the post-mortem examination. At the time of examination, they found the following external injuries.
(i) 3 cut wounds of the size 1.75 cm x 0.1 cm x epidermal death, 2 cm x 0.2 x skin deep situated more or loss parallel to each other and 3rd relatively deeper wound of size 3.25 cm x 0.5 centimeter x upto muscle depth found in the flexor aspect of mid part of right forearm in a transversely manner lying 9 cm, 10 cm and 12.5 cm proximal to the wrist. The wounds are found more deeper towards medial aspects.
(ii) 3 cut wounds of sizes 3 cm x 0.5 cm x upto muscle depth, 4 cm x 0.1 cm x epidermal depth, 2 cm x 0.1 cm x epidermal depth situated more or less parallel to each other toe transversely on the flexor-ulnar aspect of left forearm 15 cm, 15.5 cm and 17 cm. proximal to the left wrist respectively. The wounds are found more deeper towards medial aspects. The cut wounds mentioned above have not cut any l
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.