TMT. R. KASTHURI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a case of custodial death. The petitioner is the wife of the deceased - Ravi. They belong to a Scheduled Caste. On 16.08.2010, at about 01.00 a.m., when her husband was with her at her house at Parinthal Village, few police constables barged into their house and took her husband in a vehicle. When the petitioner questioned them, they told her that they were taking him for the purpose of an enquiry in connection with a case. It is further alleged that they snatched away a gold chain from the petitioner and also removed certain other properties from her house. On 17.08.2010, she told her sister-in-law - Mrs.Chitra about the occurrence. She came to know that her sister-in-law's husband had also been taken to the police station. On 18.08.2010, according to her, seven police constables came to her house and forced her to sign in a blank paper. Then, to her shock, they informed her that her husband was no more and his body was kept in the mortuary of the Government Hospital at Cuddalore. They wanted her to appear for enquiry to be held by the Executive Magistrate / Revenue Divisional Officer. She further alleges that on 19.08.2010 at 05.00 a.m. she informed one Mr.Raju about the occurrence and also had discussion with the other leaders of her community in respect of the next action to be taken. After autopsy, the body of the deceased was handed over to her at 06.00 p.m. In this regard, she made a representation to the Hon'ble Chief Minister and others alleging that her husband had fallen a victim of police torture.

(2.) The respondent - Police, have a different story. According to the respondent police, one Mr.Thiruvengadam, the Sub Inspector of Police, attached to Pudupet Police Station was deputed for nabbing the accused involved in the theft case in Crime No.95 of 2010 on the file of Nellikuppam Police Station. When the police party headed by Mr.Thiruvengadam was searching for him, at about 03.00 p.m. on 18.08.2010, the deceased was found moving on the road leading to Sathipattu Village . He was surrounded and taken into custody by the Sub Inspector of Police Mr.Thiruvengadam. On such arrest, he gave a voluntary confession, confessing to his involvement in many occurrences involving theft. When personal search was made, it was found that he had tied to his hip eight sovereigns of gold jewels. It is further stated by the respondent police that the Sub Inspector of Police was taking him towards Nellikuppam. When they were nearing the village border of Sathipattu Village, the deceased - Ravi complained to the Sub Inspector of Police that he had developed chest pain and he wanted to urinate. Therefore, he was allowed to get down from the vehilce. On getting down from the vehicle, according to the police, he started running with a view to escape. So, the Sub Inspector of Police along with the other policemen, who were with him chased the deceased. While running fast, it is alleged that accidentally, he fell into a deep pit. On reaching the pit, the Sub Inspector of Police and other police constables found the deceased unconscious. He had sustained injuries on his right ankle and fingers. As a first aid, the police gave him water. But, he did not open his eyes. Therefore, the police rushed him to the Government Head Quarters Hospital at Cuddalore at 05.20 p.m. But, the Docotor who examined the deceased - Ravi declared him already dead. The body was sent to the mortuary.

(3.) On returning to the police station, the Sub Inspector of Police submitted a special report to the Inspector of Police narrating the above occurrence. On such report, the Inspector of Police registered a case in Crime No.135 of 2010 under Section 176 (1A) of The Code of Criminal Procedure [herein after referred to as "the Code"]. Since it was a custodial death, the Inspector of Police forwarded the FIR to the Executive Magistrate / Revenue Divisional Officer, Cuddalore. Simultaneously, as per the existing general instructions of the Director General of Police, Chennai, the FIR was forwarded to the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Panruti for holding an inquiry under Section 176 (1A) of the Code. The Executive Magistrate / Revenue Divisional Officer, Cuddalore, conducted inquest on the body of the deceased and then, forwarded the body for post-mortem examination. The Judicial Magistrate commenced inquiry as per Section 176 (1A) of the Code. On 19.08.2010, at about 03.00 p.m., he held inquiry and recorded the statements of all the policemen involved in the occurrence. At about 05.00 p.m. the learned Magistrate visited the place of occurrence. He also examined two persons by name Anthoniraj and Shanmugam, who, according to the police, had witnessed the occurrence. He recorded the statements of the family members of the deceased including the petitioner herein. On 19.08.2010, the learned Magistrate visited the house of the deceased also. He examined a number of other witnesses. He completed the examination of the witnesses on 27.08.2010. In the meanwhile, the inquest report dated 25.08.2010 prepared by the Executive Magistrate / Revenue Divisional Officer was received by the learned Magistrate. The Doctor, who conducted autopsy, gave opinion as follows:-