No Work No Pay: Delhi High Court Denies Back Wages To Reinstated Army Officer State Cannot Use 'Delay & Laches' To Evade Compensation For Land Taken Without Authority Of Law: Calcutta High Court Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Jail Appeal Solely On 3157-Day Delay; Orders Release Of Life Convict After 22 Years In Jail 138 NI Act | Failure To Produce Income Tax Returns Not Fatal To Cheque Bounce Case If Debt Is Established: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Public Records Not In Party's 'Power Or Possession' Until Actually Obtained; Leave Not Required For Rebuttal Documents: AP High Court For Conviction Under Section 34 IPC, Prosecution Must Establish Prior Meeting Of Minds & Pre-Arranged Plan: Allahabad High Court Merciless Beating With Blunt Side Of Deadly Weapons To Spread Terror Constitutes Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court CIT Can’t Invoke Revisionary Jurisdiction Merely Because AO’s Enquiry Was ‘Inadequate’ If View Is Plausible: Bombay High Court Mere Presence At Crime Scene Without Proof Of Prior Concert Insufficient To Invoke Section 34 IPC For Murder: Supreme Court Courts Cannot Be Used As Tools For Coercion: Bombay HC Dismisses Application To Implead Developer Without Contractual Nexus, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Cost Specific Performance Cannot Be Granted For Contingent Contracts Dependent On Third-Party Conveyance: Madras High Court Unlawful Subletting Is A ‘Continuing Wrong’, Fresh Limitation Period Runs As Long As Breach Continues: Bombay High Court Courts Must Specify Payment Timeline In Specific Performance Decrees; Order XX Rule 12A CPC Is Mandatory: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Does Not Automatically Rescind Due To Delay; Courts Can Extend Time For Deposit: Supreme Court Madras High Court Quashes Forgery Case Against Mahindra World City After Victims Accept Alternate Land In Settlement Motor Accident Claims: 13-Day FIR Delay Not Fatal; 80% Physical Disability Can Be Treated As 100% Functional Disability: Punjab & Haryana HC Murderer Cannot Inherit Property From Victim Through Wills; Section 25 Hindu Succession Act Bar Applies To Testamentary Succession: Supreme Court Courts Must Pierce Veil Of Clever Drafting To Reject Suits Barred By Benami Law; 2016 Amendments Are Retrospective: Supreme Court Indian Railways Is A Consumer, Not A Deemed Distribution Licensee; Must Pay Cross-Subsidy Surcharge For Open Access: Supreme Court Technical Rules Of Evidence Act Do Not Apply To Departmental Enquiries: Supreme Court Public Employment Cannot Be Converted Into An Instrument Of Fraud; Police Personnel Using Dual Identity Strikes At Root Of Service: Supreme Court

Custodial Torture Cannot Be Tolerated: PH HC Convicts DSP of Punjab Police  Under Section 302 IPC

09 September 2024 3:07 PM

By: sayum


Punjab & Haryana High Court sets aside acquittals, holds police officers guilty of custodial death under Section 302 IPC. In a significant ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court overturned the acquittals of several police officers in a custodial death case, convicting them under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of Gamdoor Singh. The court found the evidence, including witness testimonies and medical reports, sufficient to establish that the police officers were responsible for the death of the victim while in custody. The judgment underscores the importance of holding law enforcement accountable for custodial violence.

The case revolved around the alleged illegal detention and custodial death of Gamdoor Singh, who was abducted by police officials, including SHO Harbhajan Singh and ASI Kirpal Singh, from his home on November 14, 1995. Witnesses testified that the police tortured Singh during his detention, causing severe injuries. He was later released in a critical condition and admitted to PGI Chandigarh, where he succumbed to his injuries on December 7, 1995. Despite these allegations, the trial court had acquitted the officers of murder charges, convicting them only for lesser offences.

The court relied heavily on the testimony of Baghel Singh (PW-3), who had initially provided incriminating evidence against the officers but later retracted parts of his statement. However, the High Court dismissed his retraction, stating that the witness had been pressured by senior police officers, including DSP Gursewak Singh, to change his testimony. The court noted, "His initial statements were consistent and aligned with the prosecution's case. The subsequent retraction, made under duress, does not diminish the credibility of his earlier testimony."

The medical reports were pivotal in establishing the cause of death. The post-mortem revealed multiple injuries on the victim’s body, including contusions and abrasions consistent with physical assault. The High Court observed, "The systemic disturbances caused by the ante-mortem injuries directly led to the death of Gamdoor Singh, despite his pre-existing cardiac and lung conditions. The injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature." The court also rejected the trial court’s reliance on an earlier medical report suggesting natural causes of death, citing that the doctors who provided these reports were not cross-examined or confronted with contradictory evidence.

The court emphasized the importance of protecting individuals from custodial violence, stating that such acts by law enforcement are intolerable in a constitutional democracy. The bench noted that the delay in the post-mortem report did not undermine the credibility of the medical evidence and that the injuries sustained by the victim were sufficient to hold the police officers accountable under Section 302 IPC. "The custodial torture inflicted on the deceased was directly responsible for his death, and the accused must bear the full consequences of their unlawful actions," the court remarked.

Justice Sureshwar Thakur, delivering the judgment, stated, "The law enforcement officers violated the fundamental rights of the deceased, and their actions cannot be condoned. Custodial violence is a grave violation of human dignity and must be punished with the full force of law." He further added, "The injuries sustained by the deceased, as corroborated by medical evidence, clearly establish the guilt of the accused under Section 302 IPC."

This judgment marks a crucial stance against custodial violence, reinforcing that law enforcement agencies are not above the law. By overturning the acquittals and convicting the police officers for murder, the High Court has sent a strong message regarding the accountability of public officials. The case will likely have far-reaching implications for future custodial violence cases, reaffirming the judiciary’s role in safeguarding the rights of individuals, even when faced with institutional pressures.

Date of Decision: 23rd August 2024​.

State of Punjab vs. Harbhajan Singh and others

Latest Legal News