Rajesh Shankar, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents more particularly the respondent no. 1 to hold an enquiry about the suspicious death of her husband in Chas Sub Jail, to take steps against erring respondents no. 4 to 8 and also to pay compensation for such custodial death.
(3.) The factual background of the case as transpires from the writ petition is that the husband of the petitioner namely Radheshyam Mahatha (now deceased) was an employee of Bokaro Steel Plant and he superannuated from service on 31.03.2003. After retirement, he demanded his share in the ancestral property from the respondent no. 7 & 8 which was objected by them. The son of the petitioner had lodged an F.I.R being Pindrajora P.S Case no. 18 of 2005 under Sections 457 and 380 of the I.P.C. The respondent no. 7 and his associates used to threaten the husband and the son of the petitioner to withdraw the case due to which the petitioner registered a Sanha Petition No. 81/2005. Thereafter, on 31.05.2015, the respondent no. 7 gave a fardbeyan before the officer-in-charge, Pindrajora Police Station alleging that Radheshyam Mahtha (since deceased) along with Sanjay Kumar Mahatha, Umesh Pandey and two other persons entered her house, assaulted her and her husband and also took away Rs.20,000/- cash as well as jewellary from them. It was further alleged that Umesh Pandey was armed with a pistol and was threatening to kill them. On the basis of the fardbeyan, an F.I.R. was lodged on the same day being Pindrajora P.S. Case no. 65 of 2005 under Sections 147/148/149/452/341/342/323/380 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 27 of the Arms Act. Radheshyam Mahtha was arrested by the respondent no. 5 at about 1:00 A.M on 04/05.06.2005 and he was produced in the court of C.J.M, Bokaro on 05.06.2005 and thereafter remanded to judicial custody. It is alleged by the petitioner that in the Sub jail, Chas, Bokaro, the deceased was tortured by the respondent no. 4 in connivance with the respondent no. 7 and 8 due to which he fell ill on 17.06.2005. The respondent no. 4 did not take any step for providing proper treatment to the deceased and as such he died in the jail at about 12:00 midnight and thereafter he was sent to the referral hospital. On 18.06.2005, when the petitioner and other family members went to see the dead body of the deceased, they saw mark of several injuries on his body including burn injury on his back and the symptoms of poisoning.;