Jharkhand High Court Directs Judicial Probe Into Alleged Custodial Death In Palamu, Seeks Inquiry U/S 196(2) BNSS

The Jharkhand High Court has ordered a judicial inquiry into allegations of custodial torture leading to the death of a man in Palamu district. The Court was hearing a contempt petition alleging violation of the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal.

A Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary observed that before initiating contempt proceedings, it must first determine whether any State functionary had violated the law laid down in D.K. Basu. Accordingly, the Bench directed the Principal District Judge, Palamu, to nominate a Judicial Magistrate to conduct an inquiry under Section 196(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The inquiry is to commence within fifteen days and a report is to be submitted within three months.

The petition was filed by the family members of Mahfuz Ahmad. They alleged that Ahmad was illegally detained by police officials on March 1, 2025 and subjected to custodial torture over several days. According to the petitioners, Ahmad was later produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate in an injured condition. They questioned the circumstances surrounding the medical fitness certificate issued prior to his remand. The petitioners further alleged that Ahmad's condition deteriorated thereafter and that he later died.

The State, on the other hand, submitted that departmental proceedings had already been initiated in the matter. It was submitted that the Officer-in-Charge of Nawabazar Police Station had been suspended and issued a show-cause notice pending inquiry.

During the hearing, the Court examined issues relating to the medical fitness certificate dated March 6, 2025. The Bench questioned Dr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Medini Rai Medical College Hospital, regarding the certificate. The doctor stated that only a photocopy of the original fitness certificate had been produced before him. He further stated that he subsequently authenticated the document after verifying hospital records.

The Court noted that the Chief Judicial Magistrate had passed the remand order after recording satisfaction regarding the medical fitness of the accused. However, it found certain aspects of the record required closer scrutiny. The Court noted:

"This Court, after going through the order dated 06.03.2025 of its first part and thereafter, the order was passed later on, fails to understand that why and on what basis the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has drawn the order by making reference of 'later on' without any motion said to be made either by the family member of the accused (now deceased) and/or the investigating officer."

The Bench further observed:

"Before initiating contempt proceedings, this Court must arrive at a concrete conclusion as to whether any error has in fact been committed by a functionary of the State, amounting to violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (supra)."

The Court noted that disputed questions of fact arose from the rival claims advanced by the parties. It therefore concluded that a judicial inquiry was necessary. Referring to its recent decision in Md. Mumtaz Ansari v. State of Jharkhand, the Court observed that custodial violence is an affront to the rule of law and reiterated the need for an independent inquiry in the present case.

The matter will now be listed after receipt of the inquiry report.

Case Title: Saida Khatoon & Ors. v. Smt. Vandana Dadel & Ors.

Case No.: Cont. Case (Civil) No. 571 of 2025.

Appearance: Shadab EqbaL and Mr. Ayush Raj for the Petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Mr. Devesh Krishna, and Mr. Kumar Pawan for the State.

Click Here To Read/Download Order