Orissa High Court Grants ₹2 Lakh Interim Compensation For Death Of Man Who Allegedly Fell From Moving Train While In Police Custody
The Orissa High Court has ordered rupees two lakh interim compensation to the mother of a 22 year-old man who allegedly died of falling from moving train while he was under the custody of the police.The Single Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi held:“Though the authorities have termed the incident as a negligent act of the deceased, foul play cannot be ruled out at this...
The Orissa High Court has ordered rupees two lakh interim compensation to the mother of a 22 year-old man who allegedly died of falling from moving train while he was under the custody of the police.
The Single Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi held:
“Though the authorities have termed the incident as a negligent act of the deceased, foul play cannot be ruled out at this stage. Irrespective, the police/prison authorities owe a duty of care and caution to an arrested person and must take reasonable care to ensure that he does not suffer physical injury as a consequence of his own acts, or the acts of a third party.”
Factual Background
The deceased Amrit Puhan was in a romantic relationship with one minor girl and eloped with her on 04.03.2018. A few days after the elopement, it is alleged, the father of the girl came with some police officials and warned the petitioner of dire consequences and threatened to kill the deceased. The father of the girl also lodged an FIR with the police.
More than a month after the elopement, the deceased and the girl were found near Silvasa Police Station, Goa and were arrested. Both of them were brought to Kolkata in a flight by the Odisha police and the father of the girl.
It was further alleged that upon reaching Kolkata, all of them stayed in a hotel where the father of the girl along with the police officials brutally assaulted the deceased. Subsequently, they travelled to Bhadrak (Odisha) in train. The petitioner alleged that during the course of train journey, the father of the girl and the police officials caused the death of her son by pushing him from running train.
Therefore, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking compensation for the custodial death of her son.
Court's Observations
It was contended on behalf of the State that the deceased was not in 'police custody' at the time of the alleged incident. However, it was also submitted that while returning in train, the deceased was not feeling well for which he had asked to go to the wash basin for vomiting. It was admitted by the respondents that the police officials took him to the basin and guarded him.
Considering the above facts, the Court was of the view that though the respondent authorities claimed that the deceased was not arrested by the police officials, but their behaviour in escorting him shows as if the deceased was in the custody of the police.
“This court has given its anxious consideration to this unfortunate episode and is of the opinion that in the circumstances of the case, it is necessary for the police/prison personnel to show that there was no negligence on their part. After all when a prisoner is in custody, it is the duty of the police/prison personnel to keep him alive and well till judicial remand,” it observed.
Justice Panigrahi further observed that when a person is taken into custody, it is the paramount duty of the State to keep him safely. If there is any dereliction of that duty, then the onus will be on the prison staff and the personnel in charge to show that there was no negligence on their part.
The Court relied upon a series of judicial precedents, including in Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa & Ors., People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & Anr. and Ahalya Pradhan v. State of Orissa wherein police authorities were held liable for death of persons in custody and their legal heirs were considered entitled for receiving compensation amount.
“Therefore, this Court comes to the conclusion that it is a case of custodial death and the authorities are responsible for the same. The authorities being the employees of the State of Orissa, the State is vicariously liable for the death of the aforesaid deceased,” the Court concluded.
Though the Bench opined that the petitioner is entitled to receive a compensation amount but it held that the full compensation amount cannot be granted when investigation of the death of the deceased is not completed. Thus, it deemed fit to grant an interim compensation amount.
“In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court feels appropriate to order State of Odisha to pay to the petitioner compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- as an interim compensation. The said amount shall be deposited by the State in this Court within ten weeks from today. This direction to pay the compensation is without prejudice to the rights of the legal representatives to claim compensation in private law proceedings, if so entitled in law, against those found responsible for his death,” the Court ordered.
Case Title: Basanti Puhan v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) No. 27928 of 2023
Date of Judgment: February 08, 2024
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Byomakesh Tripathy, Advocate
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. G.R. Mohapatra, Addl. Standing Counsel
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ori) 18