Serious Allegations Demand Accountability: Patna High Court Denies Bail To SHO in Custodial Death Case
Applications for pre-arrest bail by police officials, including the Officer-in-Charge, dismissed in a case of alleged custodial death and torture
The Patna High Court has denied pre-arrest bail to the accused in a high-profile custodial death case, affirming the gravity of allegations against the police officials involved. The judgment, delivered by Honourable Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, highlighted the conflicting evidence and the necessity for accountability in custodial death cases.
The case stems from an incident on September 8, 2021, when Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, the then Officer-in-Charge of Piro Police Station, along with other police personnel, allegedly forcibly entered the house of the complainant, Prakash Kumar, and detained him and his mother, Shobha Devi, without a warrant. They were taken to Piro Police Station, where Shobha Devi was allegedly tortured and denied basic necessities, leading to her death on September 12, 2021. A judicial inquiry initially suggested suicide, but post-mortem reports showing multiple injuries pointed towards custodial torture, contradicting the inquiry’s findings.
Seriousness of Allegations:
The court underscored the severe nature of the charges against the petitioner, Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, the then Officer-in-Charge of Piro Police Station, and three constables. The accusations included wrongful confinement, assault, and the custodial death of Shobha Devi. The court stated, “The kind of serious allegations against the police officers who are in a position of trust would not deserve any sympathy, and it would not be a fit case for the grant of pre-arrest bail.”
Contradictory Judicial Inquiry and Evidence:
Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad addressed the discrepancy between the judicial inquiry’s conclusion and the medical evidence. While the inquiry suggested suicide, post-mortem reports indicated multiple anti-mortem injuries, contradicting the suicide theory. “The inquiry by ACJM-II found evidence of suicide, but the medical evidence and complainant’s deposition indicated custodial torture,” the court noted. The medical findings included bruises and fractures, which pointed towards physical assault.
The judgment emphasized the importance of thorough investigation and accountability in cases of custodial death. The court referenced the landmark cases such as Shambhu Nath Mehra v. The State of Ajmer and Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, reiterating the necessity of a rigorous legal framework to address such grave violations of human rights.
Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad remarked, “The death has taken place in police custody, and the kind of injuries present on the body of the deceased would be enough to show that she was brutally assaulted in police custody. This Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner(s) do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.”
The Patna High Court’s dismissal of the pre-arrest bail applications sends a strong message regarding the judiciary’s stance on custodial violence and the importance of upholding human rights. By affirming the need for accountability and thorough investigation, the judgment reinforces the legal framework for addressing cases of custodial death and torture. This decision is expected to have significant implications for future cases, emphasizing the judiciary’s commitment to justice and human dignity.
Date of Decision: 6th June 2024
Ashok Kumar Chaudhary @ Ashok Chaudhary vs. The State of Bihar & Prakash Kumar @ Nitu
