'Public Gathering No Justification For Handcuffing,' Says Bombay High Court; Awards ₹50,000 Compensation

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (April 21) reminded the Maharashtra Police of its motto—'Sadrakshnaya Khalanighrahanaya' (to protect the good and punish the evil)—while awarding ₹50,000 in compensation to an advocate and a retired military man who were humiliated by being handcuffed.Sitting at the Nagpur seat, a division bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Justice Nivedita Mehta observed that the police indulging into such acts of harassing or torturing citizens, depletes the confidence of the public in the criminal justice system. The bench was hearing a plea filed by advocate Yogeshwar Kawade (33) and Avinash Date (50), both highlighting the fact that they were taken into custody and were kept in a lockup and subsequently handcuffed and produced before a Tahsildar, who granted them bail in a 'non-cognisable' (NC) complaint lodged against them as a 'cross complaint.'The judges said that the three officers - MM Dande (Assistant Police Inspector) and Constables Naresh and Deepak Gale, failed to protect the dignity of the petitioners, despite being aware of the fact that their primary responsibility was to protect and uphold the law."The respondent officers were not only the violators of the law but they have also violated the guidelines issued by the Apex Court. It may not be out of context to remind that the motto of Maharashtra State Police is 'Sadrakshnaya Khalanighrahanaya' (Sanskrit : 'To protect good and to punish evil'), which needs to be respected. Those, who are called upon to administer the criminal law, must bear, in mind, that they have a duty not merely to the individual accused before them, but also to the State and to the community at large. Such incidents involving Police usually tend to deplete the confidence in our criminal justice system much more than those incidents involving private individuals," the bench said in the judgment. As per the petitioner's case, they had initially lodged a complaint against Ravish Bire and Pankaj Bahadure, for assaulting Date and damaging his vehicle. However, their complaint was taken as an NC. Subsequently, Bire lodged a cross-complaint, which was again taken as an NC against the petitioners. The petitioners alleged that the police officials kept them in the lock up under 'preventive action' and asked them to remove all their clothes and they were left only in undergarments. They were then produced before the Tahsildar's office and during all this time, they were handcuffed and were in full public view as they were transported through 'public bus.'Justifying its action, the officers through the State pointed out that several persons had gathered outside the police station and as a preventive action they were locked up and handcuffed. The bench, however, rejected this contention."Admittedly, there is no evidence on record to show that the present Petitioners were the habitual offenders or the hardened criminals. Therefore, the justification of the State that as there was gathering of the people, and therefore, the said action was taken by the respondent officers, is not justifiable one. Thus, the officers subjected the present Petitioners to an unwarranted humiliation and indignity which cannot be done to any citizen of India and accordingly they are entitled for the compensation," the bench held. In the judgment penned down by Justice Joshi-Phalke, the bench noted that there are some punitive provisions contained in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which seek to punish violation of right to life. However, there are also provisions which provide punishment to an officer, who detains or keeps a person in confinement with a corrupt motive. The judges further noted that provisions like section 330 and 331 of the IPC also provide for punishment to officers, who harass or torture or injure a person to induce him to confess to a crime. "These statutory provisions are, however, inadequate to repair the wrong done to the citizen. Prosecution of the offender is an obligation of the State in case of every crime but the victim of crime needs to be compensated monetarily also. Where there is infringement of the fundamental right and the same is established, the Court cannot be stopped by giving a mere declaration. It must proceed further and give compensatory relief, nor by way of damages as in a civil action but by way of compensation under the public law jurisdiction for the wrong done, due to breach of a public duty by the State for not protecting the fundamental right to life of the citizen. To repair the wrong done and give judicial redress for legal injury is a compulsion of judicial conscience," Justice Joshi-Phalke has observed. With these observations, the judges ordered the State to pay Rs 50,000 each to both the petitioners. Appearance:Advocate Shriniwas Deshpande appeared for the Petitioners.Assistant Government Pleader SS Hulke represented the State.Advocates Aastha Sharma and PR Agrawal represented the Officers. Case Title: Adv. Yogeshwar Madhukarrao...

'Public Gathering No Justification For Handcuffing,' Says Bombay High Court; Awards ₹50,000 Compensation

Narsi Benwal

Tags