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

2009 Supreme(All) 1030

[2009(4) ADJ 127 (DB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : ASHOK BHUSHAN AND VINEET SARAN, JJ.
RAVINDRA NATH AWASTHI .....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 33826 of 2008, decided on 1st April, 2009)

Advocates:
Counsel :
T.P. Singh and Siddharth Nandan for the Petitioner; M.C. Chaturvedi, Chief Standing Counsel for the Respondents.

Headnote:(A) Compensation—Custodial death—Of an advocate in custody of police—Claim for compensation—On direction of High Court, District Judge conducted enquiry and submitted his report—From his report deceased was assaulted inside Central Jail, Allahabad during his period of confinement during 22nd April, 2008 to 10th May, 2008—Thereafter he was admitted in hospital in serious condition in I.C.U.—He was brought to hospital with chain tied in his legs and handcuffed hands—These things were not only contrary to law but also in violation of Paras 798(b) and 488 of U.P. Jail Manual—It was also violative of Article 21—Plea of Jail Authorities that deceased was not behaving in normal way and was not mentally fit—Not found justified—Even if, his mental condition was not good and he was behaving in abnormal way, Para 488 provides for keeping him in separate ward—Chaining and handcuffing was in against Human Rights too—Post-mortem report indicates that cause of death was his coma condition due to ante-mortem head injuries coupled with septicaemia and pus in both lungs due to infection—Entire facts and medical report showing that he died because of inhuman behaviour of police officials—High Court directed State to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 within a month to his wife, in addition to interim compensation awarded earlier—High Court directed for concluding disciplinary proceedings expeditiously against police officers of Central Jail, Naini who are found responsible for inhuman behaviour and recovery of amount of compensation from them. [U.P. Jail Manual, Paragraphs 488 and 798(b)—Constitution of India—Articles 21 and 226]. [Paras 16, 18 to 21, 33, 34 and 36]

       (B) U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants (Dying in Harness) Rules, 1974—Rule 5—Appointment—Compassionate appointment—Claimed by wife of deceased (Advocate)—Not acceptable because she being not dependant of State Government employee—Cannot get service under Rules 1974—High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction cannot direct giving of service to person who is no heir of State Employee on his death. [Para 35]

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ashok Bhushan, J.—Heard Sri T.P. Singh, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Siddharth Nandan for the petitioner and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents No. 1 to 4.

2. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being finally decided.

3. Facts giving rise to this writ petition are; petitioner’s son S.K. Awasthi, Advocate was charged with criminal contempt by a Division Bench of this Court being Criminal Contempt No. 19 of 2007. The Division Bench vide order dated 21st November, 2007 charged S.K. Awasthi with criminal contempt and directed the contemner to be taken into custody. The Division Bench to which the criminal contempt was assigned by judgment and order dated 23rd November, 2007 punished the contemner with imprisonment for a period of one month. However, on the intervention of the members of the Bar that contemner would improve, the punishment was suspended to afford an opportunity to the contemner to improve his conduct, subject to the condition that in case he misbehaves in the Court again, mere issuance of show cause notice would suffice for the sentence being revived. Subsequently by judgment and order dated 22nd April, 2008 the order of suspension of sentence was revoked and the Registrar General was directed to take S.K. Awasthi in custody and send him in Jail for serving out the sentence awarded by this Court vide judgment and order dated 23rd November, 2007. Two more charges were framed by the order dated 22nd April, 2008 and the case was directed to be listed again on 8th May, 2008.

4. S.K. Awasthi was taken into custody and was lodged in Central Jail, Naini on 22nd April, 2008 to serve the sentence. Initially S.K. Awasthi was kept in Barrack No. 8-B of Circle No. 4 of Central Jail, Naini from 22nd April, 2008 to 2nd May, 2008. On 2nd May, 2008 an order was passed by Senior Superintendent, Central Jail, Naini to keep him in separate Cell for one week and accordingly he was sent in Circle No. 1. On 6th May, 2008 he was admitted in Jail Hospital in semi unconscious state. The Jail Doctors noted several injuries on the person of S.K. Awasthi. On 8th May, 2008 S.K. Awasthi was brought on stretcher to the High Court for being produced but the Bench being not available, he could not be produced before the Court, his attendance was noted by Joint Registrar (Criminal) and he was sent back to Jail. On 10th May, 2008 S.K. Awasthi was admitted in S.R.N. Hospital, Allahabad under the reference made by Jail Doctor with the permission of the Chief Medical Officer. In the Jail his legs were tied-up with iron chain. On 13th May, 2008 S.K. Awasthi died in the hospital.

5. On being pointed out by the Members of the Bar about the death of S.K. Awasthi, which was caused in mysterious circumstances, a Division Bench passed an order on 13th May, 2008 requesting the District Judge to hold an inquiry so as to find out as to under what circumstances the death of S.K. Awasthi had been caused. The District Judge was also directed to inquire as to whether S.K. Awasthi was manhandled or ill-treated either by the Jail authorities or by the Jail inmates, and what was the reason for shifting him to the hospital and keeping him chained during the medical treatment. The Chief Medical Officer, Allahabad was directed to constitute a team consisting of three doctors to conduct the post-mortem of S.K. Awasthi. On the same day, on an application presented by Sri Rajesh Rai, Advocate informing about the death of S.K. Awasthi while in custody, another Division Bench presided over by Hon’ble the Chief Justice directed the application to be registered as Public Interest Litigation and issued notice to the Jail Superintendent asking him to explain the circumstances under which S.K. Awasthi died while in custody. On the same day the Division Bench presided over by Hon’ble the Chief Justice passed another o







































































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