SATYABHAMA DAS, W/O. LATE MAHESWAR DAS, VILLAGE: GANJA, P.O. /P.S. RAJKANIKA, DIST: KENDRAPADA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the widow of an under -trial prisoner namely, Maheswar Das, who died in jail custody, praying for a direction for investigation of the matter by the C.B.I, or any other independent investigating agency free from influence of the State machinery in order to unearth the facts in connection with the custodial death of her husband and for a further direction to the opposite parties to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/ - to the bereaved family of the deceased.

(2.) CASE of the Petitioner in a nutshell is that late Maheswar Das was working as a driver in the Police Department at Panikoili Headquarters in the district of Jajpur. While he was serving as such, he was implicated in a murder case, convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak. Against the impugned order of conviction and sentence, the deceased Maheswar Das preferred Criminal Appeal No. 216 of 1997 before this Court. Before conviction by the trial Court, he was made to suffer in Bhadrak Jail, thereafter he was shifted to Central Jail, Choudwar, Cuttack. During stay at Choudwar Jail, the deceased fell ill and he got admitted in SCB Medical College, Cuttack. The Petitioner -wife after coming to know that her husband has been admitted in the S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack, came with her children, saw her husband and returned to village on 07.08.1998. Thereafter, on 11.08.1998 some police personnel came in a car to the village of the Petitioner, met her and disclosed that her husband had escaped from the medical college while he was under treatment. On hearing such message, the Petitioner requested the police personnel to intimate the whereabouts of her husband to her, in the event her husband would be traced out. Ten days thereafter, on 22.08.1998, Manguli Mallick, the Chowkidar of Rajkanika Police Station came to Ganja and intimated the Petitioner that her husband had committed suicide. The said Chowkidar handed over a slip/chit, (Annexure -1) wherein the O.I.C., Rajakanika Police Station had written that her husband was dead. Further, it was also written that the dead body of her husband was kept in post -mortem room of S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack. The chit under Annexure -1 written by the O.I.C., Rajakanika Police Station bears no seal or signature of any authority of Rajakanika Police Station. By the time the chit was received by the Petitioner, it was on 22.08.1998 at 7 P.M. Since there was no facility to come to Cuttack Medical at that particular time to see her husband, she came by bus in the next morning i.e. on 23.08.1998 to see her husband and reached at the Medical college where from the Petitioner came to know from the official sources of the post -mortem section that just by the time she reached, the jail authorities and the employees had taken away the dead body of her husband from the post -mortem section. The Petitioner immediately telephoned to the Jail Authorities, who declined to intimate anything regarding the matter and thereafter the jailor on being asked told that the jail authorities have already cremated/ disposed of the dead body. Because of such hasty activities of the jail authorities, the family members of the deceased could not pay last visit to the deceased. The widow -Petitioner sent an F.I.R. to the Mangalabag Police Station, Cuttack mentioning therein how and why the dead body of her husband was not handed over to her.

(3.) IT is further argued that after the deceased was found out by the Police, he was meted out with persecution by the Police resulting in his death or he was made to die. Similarly, in other local dailies the cause of death was published to be suspicious one. The probable suspicion is that the Police, who arrested Maheswar from Jajpur and the jail authorities, are the authors of the custodial death of Maheswar Das. Annexure -1 shows the conduct and the manner of information regarding death of the convict -Maheswar that was intimated to the Petitioner. From the post -mortem Section of S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack, the Petitioner came to know that the dead body was hurriedly taken away and thereafter when telephone contact was made initially the jail authority declined to disclose anything regarding the death of the convict and thereafter intimated that the dead body had been cremated. The manner of cremation of the dead body and disposal of the same hurriedly makes it clear that the activities and conduct of the jail authorities and the concerned Police who caused arrest of the convict -Maheswar on 11.08.1998 made him to die. The jail authorities declined to disclose the matter and later only disclosed that the deceased -convict committed suicide and the dead body had already been disposed of. The jail authorities and the Police who are protectors of such convict have usurped their jurisdiction/limit. It is further clear from the mode of approach regarding disposal of the dead body in absence of any relations of the victim deceased is nothing but the reign of anarchism and arbitrariness which otherwise could be said to be custodial torture. Right to life includes within itself a guarantee against torture and assault by the State and its functionaries. The right is guaranteed under Article of the Constitution of India to the convict, under trial detenu and other prisoners in the custody. The State functionaries have hushed up the entire incident and thereby made abuse of their jurisdiction. Due to calculated assault and other torture the deceased victim succumbed to that. Therefore, suitable action should be taken against the jail authorities. The manner the State functionaries, the jail authorities and the Police dealt with deceased Maheswar Das and his family members and disposed of the dead body without intimating the same to the family members are quite unexpected in a democratic and civilized society governed by rule of law. Because of the arbitrary action of the State functionaries, the Petitioner and his family members were deprived of their right to pay their last visit to the deceased victim.