A judicial inquiry by a Judicial Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate is mandatory under Section 176(1A) of the Cr.P.C. for all custodial deaths, regardless of whether the death is natural or involves allegations of foul play.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Vipul Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel.

2. This Court has passed the order dated 5th August, 2026, which reads as under:

"1. Heard learned counel for the petitioner and Sri Bipul Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel for the State.

2. On the first date of hearing on admission, this court has passed the order dated 28.08.2024 which reads as under:-

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Petitioner has approached this Court for the following main relief:

"(i) issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus transfer the investigation of the First Information Report registered by the Petitioner, as Case Crime No.0041 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC at Police Station- Sangipur, District- Pratapgarh on 18.03.2024 (contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition), to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or some other independent agency, for a fair, expeditious, and just investigation."

3. Let opposite party no.3-Superintendent of Police, District Pratapgarh file his personal affidavit by 3.9.2024 with regard to compliance of Section 176(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. in the present matter as the death is alleged to have occurred in police custody.

4. List this case on 3.9.2024 in additional cause list amongst top ten cases."

3. This court has again passed an order dated 19.02.2025 which reads as under:-

"1. Learned A.G.A., on instructions, states that the matter has been sent back to the Superintendent of Police concerned for judicial inquiry also.

2. On his request, list this case after six weeks."

4. Shri Bipul Kumar Singh has filed an instruction letter dated 04.08.2026 provided by one Gaurav Trivedi, SHO of Police Station, Sangipur, District Pratapgarh. The same is taken on record.

5. As per the aforesaid instruction, Final Report No. 40 of 2024 dated 11.11.2024 has been submitted before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 02.01.2025 and the date has been fixed before the court concerned on 09.09.2026.

6. As per the aforesaid order dated 19.02.2025, this Court was informed that the matter has been sent back to the Superintendent of Police concerned for judicial inquiry. So it is not clear as to whether any judicial inquiry has been conducted by the Superintendent of Police or not in-as-much as final report dated 11.11.2024 has already been submitted on 02.01.2025 before the court concerned.

7. In view of the aforesaid fact, list this case on 12.08.2026 to enable learned AGA to seek fresh instruction from the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh or from the court concerned.

8. This matter may be taken up immediately after lunch."

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the reports have been filed by Sri Vipul Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel, which is already on record.

4. There is one report dated 03/04/2025 of Ms. Archna Tiwari-II, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh, wherein it is clear that the judicial inquiry in terms of Section 176(1)(A) Cr.P.C. has not been conducted in the present matter. In a further report dated 11/12/2025, given by one Ms. Kumud Upadhyay, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh, it has been indicated that no request for judicial inquiry has been prayed by the family members of the deceased, so no such inquiry was conducted. The report further says that the body of the deceased was sent for the post- mortem and the same was conducted and as per antemortem report, the deceased received some injuries.

5. Noticeably, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Pratapgarh had conducted the inquiry on 16/08/2024, which has been enclosed as Annexure No. P.A.-15 to the counter affidavit of the State. The medical report of the deceased has been referred and as per aforesaid Medical Report, the fact has been admitted that the deceased died when he was under custody of the STF. However, such Magistrate has observed that the death of the deceased appears to be natural as he was a heart patie