D KANNAGI Vs. NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the petitioners have come forward to challenge an order dated 17.6.2011 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Kanchipuram District and after setting aside the same seeks for a further direction to the fourth respondent to furnish copies of documents as requested in their representation dated 13.7.2011.

(2.) IT is seen from the records that the first writ petitioner was working as a Woman Sub Inspector and the second writ petitioner was the Head Constable attached to Chunambedu police station. They had registered a case against one Nagalingam in Crime No.79 of 2008. He was produced before the Judicial Magistrate at Madurandakam. The learned Magistrate had remanded the said accused Nagalingam for judicial custody. He was kept in Puzhal Central Prison. The offence alleged against the said Nagalingam was under Section 4(1)(i) and 4(1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. Though he was arrested on 12.2.2008 (Tuesday at about 6.00 a.m. in the morning), it was alleged by his wife Vennila that she went to the police station around 10.00 a.m. and met her husband. She was prevented from speaking to her husband and she was also beaten by the policemen in the station. She did not know where her husband was taken. After she being informed, she also went to the Madurandakam Sub jail and did not find her husband. Thereafter, through her Advocate, she came to know that he was taken to Puzhal Central Prison. She was not given reason for his arrest. When she actually interviwed her husband on 14.2.2008, her husband could not speak to her properly and that he had informed her that he was tortured and only if she pays Rs.500/-, he will be let off. He told her that he should be taken out of jail immediately and his body was paining and both hands and legs are shivering.

(3.) IN the meanwhile, the Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.113, Public Law and Order, dated 28.1.2011 ordering the Director General of Police to take disciplinary action against the police officials incharge of the station and also criminal action against them. An action was also directed to be taken against the medical officers of Puzhal Central Prison. The NHRC, the first respondent herein, on receipt of the intimation from the Sub Divisional Magistrate had registered it as a complaint and had issued notice to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu by its notice dated 16.12.2010. The Chief Secretary was directed to show cause on the report. A reply was sent by the Additional Secretary to the Government, Public Law and Order on 13.1.2011. IN that the State Government had informed that they had sanctioned Rs.1 lakh to be paid as compensation towards the death of remand prisoner Nagalingam as a special case. But the NHRC on considering the reply had found that the deceased was 42 years old and he had sustained injuries during his custody. Therefore, it had recommended compensation of Rs.3 lakhs to be paid as monetary relief. The Government was directed to pay the said amount to the next kin of the deceased and also to inform the Commission for further consideration. It is only after the Commission's notice, dated 9.2.2011, which was received by the State Government on 3.3.2011, the issue which was kept in dormant got activated. The State Government which originally issued G.O.Ms.No.220, Public Law and Order, dated 4.3.2011 granting Rs.1 lakhs, had increased the compensation as per the direction by granting another Rs.2 lakhs by G.O.Ms.No.436, Public Law and Order, dated 23.5.2011.