HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
SHEKHAR B. SARAF, MANJIVE SHUKLA, JJ.
Prema Devi – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. Thru. its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and others – Respondents
WRIT C. No. 579 of 2025
Decided On : 20-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of custodial death events. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. contentions raised by the petitioner. (Para 2) |
| 3. respondents' arguments regarding suicide. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. court analysis of state's liability. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 5. compensation principles established. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. judgment conclusion on compensation. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.
The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay just and adequate compensation to the petitioner on account of unnatural death of her minor son (Sukhvinder) on February 20, 2024 in District Prison Pilibhit. The petitioner in furtherance seeks direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to ensure action against the guilty persons, who are responsible for the unnatural death of the son of the petitioner.
FACTS
1. The factual matrix of the present writ petition is delineated below:
a. A criminal case bearing case no. 742/2016, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC and 3/4 of the POCSO Act, P.S. Puranpur, District Pilibhit was registered against the minor son of the petitioner, for which he had already undergone imprisonment for about three years and ten months and was enlarged on bail on February 12, 2022.
b. Petitioner’s son was required to appear before the trial court, but due to unavoidable circumstances, he could not appear. Consequently, he was arrested by the police on February 7, 2024 in execution of a warrant and thereafter detained in jail.
c. On February 20, 2024, the petitioner was informed by the respondents that her son had died in custody. Before handing over the dead body to the family for cremation, a Panchnama and Post Mortem examination were conducted on the same day. The Panchnama indicated that the deceased had died on account of hanging by a muffler and the post mortem report disclosed the cause of death of the deceased as ‘asphyxia due to antimortem hanging’ with the presence of ligature mark on the neck.
d. The petitioner was informed by respondent authorities about the various financial beneficial schemes and was assured for the grant of the same vide letter dated February 22, 2024.
e. On October 5, 2024, an inquest report to inquire into the cause of death of the deceased was submitted by Judicial Magistrate in accordance with Section 176 CrPC (corresponding Section 196 BNSS), after taking into consideration the Panchnama and Post Mortem report. It was observed therein that the deceased had succumbed to suicide by hanging himself and it was further noted that no external injury of any kind was found on the body of the deceased. Additionally, it was observed that no information regarding harassment and instigation by jail authorities had been given by the jail inmates.
f. The National Human Rights Commission, after considering the panchnama, inquest report, and post mortem report furnished by the jail authorities, vide order dated October 10, 2024, directed payment of compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the nearest family member of the deceased.
g. In pursuance thereof, the State issued a letter dated November 21, 2024 to the Director General of Police, Prison Administration, communicating the direction of NHRC to pay compensation to the next of kin of the deceased prisoner and submit an inquest report with regard to the same as soon as possible.
h. The petitioner moved an application dated December 6, 2024, seeking compensation on account of the unnatural death of her son.
i. Being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in not granting compensation to the petitioner for the unnatural death of her son while in custody of District Jail, the writ petitioner has come before this Court by filing the present writ petition.
CONTENTIONS OF PETITIONER
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner has made the following submissions:-
a. The minor son of
Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa
Re-Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons
State of Andhra Pradesh v. Challa Ramakrishna Reddy and others
The state is strictly liable for unnatural deaths in custody, necessitating compensation for the victim's family under Article 21 of the Constitution.
State is liable for failing to protect individuals in police custody, requiring compensation for unnatural deaths under Article 21.
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.
Compensation for custodial death necessitates proof of unnatural death; not every death in custody qualifies under the compensation scheme.
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....
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....
The court affirmed that custodial deaths necessitate compensation reflecting rights violations, applying Motor Vehicle Act standards for calculating damages.
State authorities are vicariously liable for negligence leading to custodial death, with victims entitled to compensation under Article 21 of the Constitution.
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.