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

2022 Supreme(Ori) 236

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. MURALIDHAR, R.K. PATTANAIK, JJ.
Smt. Bishnupriya Pattnaik and Another – Petitioners
Versus
State of Orissa and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 33492 of 2011
Decided On : 19-04-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: P.K. Rath.
For the Respondent: J. Katikia.

The court's decision was influenced by the lack of evidence showing ill-treatment or negligence by jail officials in the custodial death.

Headnote:

Custodial Death - Compensation Claim - IPC, Cr.P.C., Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 498A IPC, Section 34 IPC, Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act

Fact of the Case:

The parents filed a petition claiming compensation for the unnatural custodial death of their son, alleging ill-treatment of the under-trial prisoner. The court found no evidence of foul play in the death.

Finding of the Court:

The court found no material to conclude that the death was due to ill-treatment or negligence of jail officials.

Issues: Claim for compensation for custodial death, alleged ill-treatment and negligence of jail officials, examination of medical reports and SHRC findings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the examination of medical reports and SHRC findings, which indicated no foul play in the death.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, as there was no evidence to support the claim for compensation.

JUDGMENT :

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

1. The parents (Petitioners) of a 38 year-old man, Susanta Pattnaik, who died while in jail custody at the Kendrapara Sub-Jail, filed this petition way back in 2011 claiming compensation for his death on the allegation that it was an unnatural custodial death as a result of the ill-treatment of the under-trial prisoner.

2. The present petition, although filed on 27th December 2011, came up for hearing for the first time only on 10th March, 2015 when a learned Single Judge of this Court directed the Opposite Parties to file their counter affidavit.

3. According to the Petitioners, their son, late Susanta Pattnaik married on 30th January, 2005. As a result of the differences that arose between him and his wife, she left the matrimonial home on 5th October, 2005 to live with her parents. On 14th July 2007, P.S. Case No. 259 of 2007 was registered at the Kendrapara Police Station (PS) against Susanta Pattnaik and his parents i.e. the Petitioners herein as well as two of his sisters for the offences under Section 498A IPC read with Section 34 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is stated that in the said case, the present Petitioners along with the deceased Susanta Pattnaik and two of his sisters were arrested by the Inspector In-charge Kendrapara from their residence at Burla on 15th July, 2007 and were forwarded to the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM), Kendrapara on the next day. On 25th July 2007, the mother i.e. Petitioner No. 1 and the daughters were released on bail. The father was released on bail on 30th July, 2007. However, the bail application of late Susanta Pattnaik was rejected and he was remanded to jail custody.

4. On 31st July 2007, BLAPL No. 447 of 2007 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was filed before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kendrapara and listed for hearing on 7th August, 2007. Thereafter, it was adjourned to 17th August, 2007.

5. It is stated that the elder brother of late Susanta Pattnaik received a telephonic call on 13th August, 2007 at around 9.15 P.M. that Susanta Pattnaik had died. The Post-Mortem (PM) of the deceased was conducted on 14th August, 2007. The Petitioners state that they submitted a representation on 12th October, 2007 to the Collector, Kendrapara and on 8th November, 2007 to the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) for conducting an enquiry and taking action against the jail officials for being responsible for the custodial death of their son. It is alleged that he was deliberately tortured while in jail custody at the instance of the complainant and her relatives, one of whom was a public prosecutor. One other allegation of the Petitioners is that Susanta Pattnaik was diabetic, and because of lack of adequate medical treatment at the appropriate time, his health condition deteriorated; due to the negligence of the jail officials his death resulted.

6. The SHRC had by an order dated 14th August, 2007 acting on a news item that appeared in the daily “Dharitri” took Suo Motu cognizance and asked the IG of Prisons to submit its report. Pursuant thereto, the IG submitted a report along with medical documents. This report indicated that the late Susanta Pattnaik was suffering from diabetes congenitally as were both his parents. He was treated in the jail hospital on 17th July 2007 and 9th and 10th August, 2007 with medicines and insulin. On 13th August 2007, at around 12.30 P.M. he complained of pain in his backbone and was shifted to the District Headquarters Hospital, Kendrapara at 1.15 P.M. as per the advice of the Jail Medical Officer. He was admitted there as an indoor patient at 1.45 P.M. The treatment was continued and medicines were administered, but he died at 7.30 P.M. while undergoing treatment.

7. In terms of the PM examination, the cause of death was opined as being due to cardiac failure because of coronary artery disease consistent with the advanced diabetic medical conditions for which the late Susanta Pattnaik was

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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