CHETIAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to pay to the petitioner a compensation of a sum of Rs. 10 ,00,000 /- and to prosecute the delinquent police officials by entrusting the investigation to the 6th respondent and also to take disciplinary action against the police personnel and others responsible for the wrongful confinement, illegal detention, torture, ill-treatment and the murder of the husband of the petitioner.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner, as culled out from the affidavit filed in support of the petition, is as follows:- 2. 1. THE petitioner is the wife of one Karnan, a labourer in brick kiln. THE said Karnan, against whom several cases were pending, had a brawl with one person in a wine shop on 30. 11. 2003. When Tolasampatti police came to apprehend him, there was a wordy altercation between the police and karnan and he ran away from the scene, but was apprehended later. THE Police officials belonging to Taramangalam and Omalur tortured him brutally. 2. 2. On 1. 12. 2003 he was taken to Omalur Government Hospital where he was treated for injuries. THEreafter, Inspector Asaithambi and Sub Inspector ashokan attached to Omalur Police Station and other four policemen blind-folded him and after tying his hands and chaining his legs separately, took him to an undisclosed location, put him in an underground chamber and assaulted brutally. 2. 3. THEreafter, on 9. 12. 2003, Karnan was produced before the Court as if he was arrested on the earlier day suppressing the illegal custody between 1. 12. 2003 and 9. 12. 2003, and he was remanded to Central Prison, Salem. On 30. 12. 2003 the petitioner had an opportunity to meet her husband, when he was brought to Court and at that time, he narrated what had happened. On 27. 1. 2004 when the petitioner met him when he was brought to Court, he informed her that the police had beaten him again and got his signature in a blank paper. He apprehended that something would happen to him in future. 2. 4. On 21. 2. 2004, the father-in-law of the petitioner was also taken by police who detained him for no reason. Inspector Asaithambi threatened her father-in-law that if Karnan did not accept all the crimes, he would lodge cases against all the members of the family. 2. 5. On 24. 2. 2004, the Assistant Superintendent of Police interrogated her husband. Later, the Superintendent of Police also visited the police station in whose presence, her husband was beaten up. THEn, her father-in-law was released and her husband Karnan was taken in a jeep and he was produced before the Court. THEreafter, he was taken to an isolated place near Christian graveyard near Omalur Pagalpatti Road and killed him by shooting. 2. 6. Suppressing the true events, the Inspector of police, Omalur lodged a complaint describing it as an encounter. According to the police, the petitioners husband removed the revolver from Sub Inspector ashokan and when he was about to shoot, the Inspector, by way of self-defence, fired at him three rounds from his pistol, which is not true. 2. 7. THEre are strong reasons to believe that the conspiracy to kill her husband in an encounter was hatched at the behest of the superintendent of Police. When the family members went to give a complaint to the third respondent, they were prevented and assaulted by the police. However, the sister of deceased preferred a complaint to the third respondent. THE fourth respondent conducted an enquiry, but in a biased manner. Complaints were made to Human Rights Commission also. But, no action has been taken against the police personnel who tortured the husband of the petitioner. It is a mandatory duty on the part of the respondents 1 to 5 to safeguard the life and dignity of citizens and to prevent torture and harassment in custody and having failed to do so, they are liable to pay compensation to the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the above prayer.

(3.) EVEN though WP. M. P. Nos. 31208 and 31209 of 2004, filed for a direction to respondents 1 to 5 to initiate disciplinary action against the delinquent police officials and also for a direction to the first respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs as interim compensation, came up for hearing yesterday, after finding that the allegations made against the respondents and the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be kept pending indefinitely as it would amount to denial of justice and the further delay would also hamper the investigation itself, the matter was adjourned today, only at the request of the learned Government Advocate.