Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Prabina Kumari Mohuria – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claims of custodial death and violence. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of the incident and police actions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. opposition arguments against allegations. (Para 5) |
| 4. further judicial consideration. (Para 6) |
| 5. court's analysis and observations. (Para 7) |
Judgment :
1. Claiming compensation on the ground of custodial death of the deceased, Akash Mohuria, son of the present petitioners, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. But in view of the number of injuries found in the body of the deceased and the cause of death indicated therein and in order to disprove the stand taken by the police in the F.I.R lodged at their instance in Jeypore Town P.S. Case No.33 dated 30.01.2017, Petitioner no.2 moved the Orissa Human Rights Commission in Case No.711 of 2017. Pursuant to the order passed by the Commission on 07.09.2021, Crime Branch police registered a case vide CID, (CB) P.S. Case No.17 dated 12.11.2021 under Sections 342 /323/325/302/506 and 34 of the I.P.C. In view of the nature of injury sustained by the deceased and reflected in the post-mortem report and the opinion given by the Assistant Professor Department of FMT, SLNMCH, Koraput on 09.12.2021 and the obser
The court underscored the state's liability for custodial deaths and established a precedent for compensating victims against police violence.
The State has a constitutional obligation to ensure the safety of individuals in police custody; custodial deaths demand scrutiny and compensatory measures for rights violations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of strict liability for the negligence of the police in cases of custodial deaths, emphasizing the fundamental rights of prisoners an....
State authorities are vicariously liable for negligence leading to custodial death, with victims entitled to compensation under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Custodial torture leading to death violates Article 21; State is liable for compensation due to vicarious liability for its officials' actions.
The court emphasized the responsibility of the police to ensure the safety of individuals in their custody and the entitlement of dependents to compensation in cases of custodial death.
The State is responsible for tortuous acts of its employees, and the award of compensation against the State is an appropriate remedy for the infringement of fundamental rights under Article 21 of th....
State liability arises for custodial deaths due to police negligence, affirming the right to compensation under Article 21.
State authorities have a duty of care to ensure the safety of individuals in custody, and negligence in this duty can result in liability for custodial deaths.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
