Bombay High Court Awards Compensation to Tribal Minor Girl for Custodial Torture and Illegal Detention - State Liable for Violation of Fundamental Rights Under Articles 21 and 22 of Constitution of India. Court Held That Wrongful Detention, Torture, and False Implication of a Juvenile in Serious Offences Constitute Gross Violation of Human Rights, Entitling Victim to Compensation.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 114
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Parbatabai Sakharam Taram, a tribal woman belonging to the Gond caste, filed a criminal writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking compensation for her wrongful detention, false implication in serious offences, custodial torture, and violation of her fundamental and human rights. She claimed that in 1990, when she was 13 years old and studying in 5th standard, Police Officer A.B. Chavan (since deceased) along with other constables visited her house at midnight, brutally assaulted her and her mother, and took her to the police station without any lady constable. She was wrongfully detained and tortured in police custody, and thereafter falsely implicated in three cases under serious charges including the TADA (P) Act, 1987. The petitioner also invoked the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court, after considering the submissions, found that the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 were grossly violated. The court held that the State is liable to pay compensation for such violations and directed the State of Maharashtra to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- to the petitioner within three months. The court also directed the State to initiate departmental inquiry against the erring police officers.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights - Compensation for Custodial Violence - Articles 21, 22, 226, 227 of the Constitution of India - Petitioner, a tribal minor girl, was illegally detained, tortured, and falsely implicated in serious offences by police officers - Court held that the State is liable to pay compensation for violation of fundamental rights, and directed payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the petitioner (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for wrongful detention, false implication, custodial torture, and violation of fundamental and human rights, including rights under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the petition and directed the State of Maharashtra to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the petitioner within three months. The court also directed the State to initiate departmental inquiry against the erring police officers.

Law Points

  • Custodial torture
  • Illegal detention
  • Compensation for fundamental rights violation
  • Juvenile justice
  • Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
  • 1989
  • TADA (P) Act
  • 1987
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006 LawText (BOM) (01) 38

Criminal Writ Petition No.191 of 2004

2006-01-10

J.N. Patel, R.C. Chavan

Smt. P.M. Chandekar for petitioner, Mr. D.B. Yengal, A.P.P. for respondents

Parbatabai Sakharam Taram

The State of Maharashtra, Commissioner of Police, Gondia, Commissioner of Police, Nagpur, Shri Suryavanshi, Central Jail, Nagpur

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal writ petition seeking compensation for wrongful detention, false implication, custodial torture, and violation of fundamental and human rights.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- and direction for inquiry against erring police officers.

Filing Reason

Petitioner, a tribal minor girl, was illegally detained, tortured, and falsely implicated in serious offences by police officers in 1990.

Issues

Whether the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 were violated by the police. Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for custodial torture and illegal detention.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that she was a minor at the time of arrest, wrongfully detained, tortured, and falsely implicated in three cases under TADA and other serious charges. Respondents did not contest the facts but argued on the quantum of compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The State is liable to pay compensation for violation of fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India, especially in cases of custodial torture and illegal detention of a minor.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner has approached this court seeking compensation from the respondents and officials in the police department by invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India... It is the case of the petitioner that she is tribal belonging to caste Gond and resident of Arjuni (Mor) in Gondia District and that they come from a very poor family.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No.191 of 2004 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, seeking compensation and inquiry against police officers. The court heard the matter and pronounced judgment on 10-01-2006.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 21, 22, 226, 227
  • Juvenile Justice Act, 1986:
  • Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989:
  • Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Awards Compensation to Tribal Minor Girl for Custodial Torture and Illegal Detention - State Liable for Violation of Fundamental Rights Under Articles 21 and 22 of Constitution of India. Court Held That Wrongful Detention, Torture, ...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Boat Owner in Bumper Ride Accident Due to Lack of Evidence of Negligence. Petitioner not present at scene and no material to show rash or negligent act under Sections 279, 337, 304A IPC...