Back
2014 Supreme(Megh) 234
MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT, SHILLONG
Sudip Ranjan Sen, J.
Shrina Begum - Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya - Respondent
W.P. (Crl) No. 8 of 2013
Decided On : 27-11-2014
For the Petitioner: R. Kar, Adv.
For the Respondents: N.D. Chullai, Sr. GA and J.M. Thangkhiew, GA.
The judgment establishes the principle that torture in police custody violates human rights and fundamental rights, warranting compensation and adherence to legal guidelines.
Headnote:
Torture - Human Rights - D.K. Basu Versus State of West Bengal - (1997) 1 SCC 416
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's husband, a forest guard, was falsely implicated in a case, tortured in police custody, and denied proper medical treatment. The petitioner sought relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused was tortured in police custody and awarded Rs. 15,000 as compensation to the petitioner.
Issues: Torture in police custody, denial of medical treatment, violation of human rights and fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the medical evidence and concluded that the accused was tortured in police custody, leading to the award of compensation.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, directing the State Govt. to pay Rs. 15,000 as compensation and instructed the police to follow the guidelines of D.K. Basu Versus State of West Bengal.
Judgment
Sudip Ranjan Sen, J.1. The petitioner's case in brief is that:
"The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the petitioner who is the wife of the victim who was arrested in connection with Phulbari P.S. Case No. 51(9) of 2013.
The petitioner's husband who is a forest guard under the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council was falsely implicated in the aforesaid case and was arrested by the Phulbari Police where he was subjected to gruesome physical torture and thereafter he was admitted in the Phulbari Community Health Centre and kept handcuffed in the Hospital bed, despite advise by the doctors for providing a better treatment in a hospital properly equipped as the injuries caused is grievous and the said Community Health Centre lacks proper facilities the victim is yet to be given better treatment.
The treatment meted out to the victim is a flagrant violation of Human Right and also in violation of the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, further it is also a violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in D.K. Basu Versus State of West Bengal, : SCC 1997, Vol:1, Page: 416. And hence the petitioner prays for appropriate relief".
2. On the basis of the petition filed by the petitioner, this court passed an order dated 19.05.2014 in W.P. (CRL) No. 8 of 2013 directing the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tura to conduct an enquiry to find out the truth.
3. In compliance with the order dated 19.05.2014 passed by this court, the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tura furnish his report dated 05.09.2014.
4. Mr. R. Kar, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the petitioner argued that, when the accused Atfur Rahaman Azad was arrested, he had no physical injury, but in police custody he has been tortured physically and mentally and as a result, he sustained physical injury and was admitted in hospital for quite sometime.
The learned counsel also further argued that for such gruesome act of the police, adequate compensation may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned Sr. GA appearing for and on behalf of the State submitted that, there was no torture. The accused was suffering from old ailment so; the question for compensation does not arise.
6. I have perused the enquiry report dated 05.09.2014 submitted by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tura wherein, it appears that he has examined as many as 25(twenty five) witnesses. Specifically, on perusal of the evidence of the doctor, who first examine the accused Atfur Rahaman Azad on 14.09.2013 on being produced by the police, it appears that after examination of the accused, he did not find any external injury on any part of the body of the accused. Thereafter, the accused was sent back along with the police personnel and the medical report. From his deposition, it is also clear that no injury was detected on the body of the accused on 15.09.2013. So, he was released and sent back to the police along with the medical report. Further, he stated that when the accused was produced on 16.09.2013 at around 7:55 PM by the police personnel and examine medically, he noticed that there is bruise and swelling on both side of the buttock 10 x 8 cm and no other injury detected. From the deposition of the doctor, it also appears that the accused disclose that he sustained injury due to police torture.
On 06.10.2013 the accused was examined by the medical board. It was detected that there was ulcer on left buttock with loss of skin with sign of infection. It is also further revealed from the enquiry report that healing of infection was delayed due to shortage of medicines in the hospital. Thereafter, he was shifted to Tura Civil Hospital for a better treatment as per the direction of this court. It is also apparent from the enquiry report that all the police personnel who were on duty denied any tortured upon the accused. So, on analysis of this enqui
