VERMA, J. - (1.) THE present petitioner who was real brother of one Bajrang Lal S/o Banna Lal has moved this writ petition for a direction to respondents to order an enquiry into the matter of unnatural and untimely death of deceased Bajrang Lal on 13. 11. 95 through an Independent Agency and also to direct respondent to prosecute the real culprits and to pay adequate compensation for the untimely and unnatural death of said Bajrang Lal in custody of Police.
(2.) IT is the allegation of petitioner that his real brother Bajrang Lal (hereinafter called as `deceased') aged 29 years having good physique and good health, who was working as driver of truck No. RBA 4625 was involved in a minor truck accident with another truck RSQ 5009 and there was a small quarrel between the brother of petitioner and another truck driver Kishan Lal & Khalasi Mithu. A report was lodged by deceased in Police Station Chandriya as FIR No. 348/95 for the offence under Sec. 341 and 323 IPC, against the said persons on 31. 10. 95. The counter FIR was also reported by the driver of other truck on the same day and the truck No. RBA 4625 was taken into custody by the police. Therefore, the deceased returned back to his village and reported the matter to truck-owner Shamsuddin. On 12. 11. 95, the owner of the truck Shamsuddin and the deceased said to have left the village for going to police station and reached at police station. On 13. 11. 95 the deceased is said to have involved in FIR No. 361/95 for the offence u/sec. 454 and 511 IPC at about 8. 00 am. It is stated that he was brutally beaten up by police officials and he was taken into custody and sent to sub-jail Chittorgarh in evening of 13. 11. 95. The deceased died in the morning of 14. 11. 95 in sub-jail Chittorgarh. The post mortem was done on the same day, which is attached with the writ petition as annexure-1. The dead-body of deceased was given to petitioner on 15. 11. 95. The threats were given to petitioner not to raise any voice and if he raise any voice he would suffer dire consequences of the same. Some enquiry is said to have been made about causing of death of deceased. The petitioner says that because of the cruelty and atrocities having been committed by police in custody with his brother, death had been caused. Notice was issued to respondents. Reply has been filed. It is not denied that the deceased had died during custody that is next day of taking him into custody. However, it is submitted that the post mortem report as conducted by Medical Board shows the cause of death "shock Due to Anti Myocardial infraction" commonly known as AMI, which is short of a Heart Attack. It is denied that the deceased was subjected to any cruel treatment or that he was given beating. A Magisterial Enquiry is said to have been held u/sec. 176 Cr. P. C. , but without any result. However, it is admitted that on 13. 11. 95 the owner of truck Shamsuddin and Bajrang Lal had reached in Chandriya in connection with getting the said truck released. It is stated in written statement that on 13. 11. 95 the deceased had consumed excess liquor and said to have entered in the house of one Rajendra Prasad with the intention to commit theft and he was caught hold of in the house of Rajendra Prasad, who raised hues and cry and the deceased was apprehended and he was given beating by residents of the area. An FIR was got recorded being FIR No. 361/95 for the offence u/sec. 454 and 511 IPC. It is stated that the deceased might have suffered some injuries at that time. He was remanded to Judicial Custody by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) Chittorgarh. The deceased was sent to sub-jail Chittorgarh at 4. 00 pm on 13. 11. 95, but he died on the next morning. It is not denied by respondent that the deceased had died in judicial custody. The post mortem report has been placed on record, conducted on 14. 11. 95. In post mortem report nothing has been mentioned of the fact that the deceased had taken any liquor. It is mentioned in the post mortem report that the death of deceased had occurred while in judicial custody. Along with the written statement, the respondent had also filed the copy of FIR No. 361/95. The post mortem report as attached with the writ petition shows that the right lung and left lung were congested so were the liver, splee, kidneys and brain. The conjection of spleen, kidney and the brain given out that if the case had been of ante myocardial infraction, an opinion is required as to why the spleen, kidney, liver, lungs and brain had congested. The report of Visra examination is also not on record. The Agency has not cared even to produce on record the report of Visra, which was preserved for chemical examination with regard to poison.
(3.) IT was a case which needed complete and further investigation. Even though the Officer-Incharge had filed the written statement, but no report of chemical examination of Visra has been produced on record or there is no explanation about congested condition of many important organs, as narrated above. IT becomes more necessary in view of the healthy body of deceased of 29 years of age and who had no previous history of any heart disease. The expert opinion of medical examination in this regard is required. From narration of facts, a doubt has been created in the mind of the court to the effect about real cause of death of deceased. The deceased was taken into custody in evening and on the next day he is found dead. He was healthy person of 29 years of age. He was a truck driver. The counter FIR No. 361/95 does not cast a doubt on the fact of admission of respondent that on 13. 11. 95 the deceased accompanied by Samsuddin, owner of truck, had reached to police station. In written statement, filed by respondents, it has been mentioned that the deceased had consumed heavy liquor and entered in the house of one Rajendra Prasad for the purpose of committing theft, whereas in the post mortem report or medical examination the fact of liquor has not been mentioned. In my opinion, it is a fit case where independent enquiry is required to be conducted into causes of death of deceased-Bajranglal. For the reason that the death had occurred in custody either of police or jail authorities, it shall be appropriate that the case be enquired into by S. P. , CBI, Jaipur himself or by deputing a high independent official but not less than the rank of Dy. S. P. , and if any case is made out, register a case in accordance with law against the real culprits. ;