- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Madras High Court Directs State To...
Madras High Court Directs State To Compensate Man Detained For 8 Months Despite Acquittal
Upasana Sajeev
16 Jan 2023 6:15 AM GMT
The Madras High Court recently directed the State to award interim compensation to a man who was illegally detained in prison for more than 8 months even after the court had acquitted him of his murder charges.Justice Sunder Mohan noted that since the man was not aware of his rights, he had not preferred an appeal and as such was not aware of his acquittal. Thus, it was necessary for the court...
The Madras High Court recently directed the State to award interim compensation to a man who was illegally detained in prison for more than 8 months even after the court had acquitted him of his murder charges.
Justice Sunder Mohan noted that since the man was not aware of his rights, he had not preferred an appeal and as such was not aware of his acquittal. Thus, it was necessary for the court to come to the aid of such persons.
This Court further finds that the petitioner's son was not aware of his rights as could be seen from the fact that no appeal was preferred by him and he was not aware of the acquittal of the co-accused in his case. This Court has to come to the aid of such citizens, who are not even aware of their basic rights. These are the citizens, who have to be compensated adequately.
The court thus directed the state to pay an interim compensation of 3,50,000 rupees to the man. The court also noted that the man was at liberty to file for damages, if he is entitled for more compensation.
Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the State must pay to the petitioner's son a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) as compensation within a period of three weeks from today. However, this order will not preclude the petitioner's son to file appropriate proceedings for damages, if the petitioner's son is able to show that he is entitled to more compensation.
In the present case, the petitioner's son Chokkar was convicted as second accused in a murder case along with one Mayilraj. When Mayilraj preferred an appeal, his conviction was set aside and he was acquitted. The court noted that since Chokkar was also convicted on similar grounds, he was also entitled for acquittal.
However, since neither the petitioner nor his son Chokkar were aware of their rights or about the directions issued by the court. Thus, Chokkar continued to be in jail.
Though the authorities, in their counter had submitted that release was not effected since the court order did not specify Chokkar's name, they agreed that same was not a ground or excuse to keep detaining Chokkar. The authorities also assured the court that strict action had been taken against the erring officials.
Finding this to be satisfactory, the court noted that no further direction in that regard was necessary. However, the court highlighted that Chokkar was entitled to compensation as per the dictum of the Supreme Court in Rudul Shah v State of Bihar and ordered as such.
The court also sought for a status report with respect to setting up of user friendly kiosks in prisons for prisoners to check their case status. The court also sought for status report with respect to appointment of advocates as legal aid counsels to appraise the prisoners of their rights and further assist them in obtaining reliefs.
Case Title: Rathinam v State
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 16
Case No: WP (MD).No.10524 of 2020
Next Story
