R DHANALAKSHMI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the unfortunate wife of one Rajmohan, who was admittedly died while in police custody. It is not in dispute that the said Rajmohan, the husband of the petitioner, was taken under police custody at 5.00 a.m. on 23.3.1995 by Thiru R. Eswaran,the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Karur Police Station. While the deceased Rajmohan was taken in a van towards Karur, he was tortured and beaten to death by the said Sub-Inspector of Police. Since the death was in police custody and the allegation that the deceased was tortured and due to said torture he died, the Sub Collector, Karur conducted an enquiry under Section 145 of Police Standing Order. THE Sub Collector in his report found that the deceased Rajmohan died only on account of the torture at the hands of the Sub Inspector of Police, karur Police Station. THE post mortem certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Government Hospital, karur also revealed that the victim Rajmohan died of Neurogenic shock due to the pain caused by injuries on chest at 10 to 14 hours prior to autopsy. THE autopsy was conducted at 5.00 p.m. On 23.3.1995.

(2.) CONSIDERING the custodial death, placing reliance on G.O. Ms. No. 1069 Public ( Law and Order-A) Department dated 14.11.1995, the Government sanctioned a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the petitioner under Chief Minister's Public Relief Fund and as an ex-gratia payment and the said amount was paid to the petitioner on 17.1.1996. Even in the counter affidavit,the fact that the deceased Rajmohan died due to torture at the hands of the said Sub-Inspector of Police is not denied. In fact, in the additional counter affidavit filed by the Additional Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order-A) Department, Secretariat, Chennai.9, it is stated that the said Sub Inspector of Police was also proceeded with an enquiry under Police Standing Order and was found guilty. The Government also ordered criminal prosecution and departmental action against him. However, the criminal case filed against the said Sub Inspector of Police ended in acquittal. The Government has also filed an appeal against the order of acquittal before this Court and the same is pending. The Departmental action was also initiated and charges were framed against the Sub Inspector of Police and he was awarded punishment.

(3.) COMING to the question of quantum, it must be noted that the deceased was 29 years age on the date when he died in police custody. This fact has not been disputed by the respondents in the counter affidavit. Further, the fact that the deceased left at the time of his death, the petitioner, wife of the deceased aged about 27 years two minor sons by name Gowthaman aged 7 years and Saravanan aged 5 years apart from his mother Anjalaiammal aged 55 years, has not been disputed by the respondent in the Counter affidavit. Infact, in para 4 of the counter affidavit the respondents have stated as follows: "The Writ Petitioner submitted that she is the legal heir of the deceased Rajmohan as the deceased's wife. Records of enquiry revealed that the age of the deceased is 32/95.."