SATYAVATIBAI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek direction against respondent No. 1 to pay compensation of Rs. Ten lakhs to the heirs of the deceased Inderjitsingh Anantsingh Chauhan, the son of petitioner No. 1 and brother of petitioner No. 2 for the custodial death of Inderjitsingh.

(2.) Briefly, the case of the petitioners is as under:

(3.) On 7-9-2004 affidavit of of Amitesh Kumar, Superintendent of Police, Yavatmal was filed. In the said affidavit it has been stated that deceased Inderjitsingh was habitual and harden criminal and he was in habit of committing offences like assault, criminal intimidation and property offences. There were seven offences registered against him at Pusad police station. It is further stated that on 24-10-2003 Inderjitsingh was arrested for offences punishable under sections 307, 353 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered vide Crime No. 260/2003 in Pusad police station, pursuant to the report lodged by Kailash Nimbarte. Since Inderjitsingh died accidental death A.D. 31/2003 was registered and since it was a case of custodial death, inquest panchanama was conducted by Tahsildar and the body was referred for the examination to Government Medical College, and the postmortem was conducted by panel of three doctors. Thereafter the investigation in Crime No. 260/2003 was handed over to C.I.D. Crime, Yavatmal. During investigation of the crime, respondent No. 3 registered offences punishable under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code vide Crime No. 94/2004 against respondents 5 to 14. It was further stated that the investigation was in progress.