Police Must Follow Rules Of Law: Jharkhand HC Orders State To Pay ₹5 Lakh Compensation To Man Illegally Detained For Four Months

The Jharkhand High Court has directed the State to pay a compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to a man who was illegally detained by the police for around four months. It said that the police must follow the rules of law and the mandate of the Constitution of India.

A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi held, “In the case in hand, admittedly the police has taken the petitioner in custody for a crime, which, he has not committed and subsequently the police has submitted the final form stating the mistake of fact, the petitioner was discharged by the learned court considering that the CID has further stated that nothing has found against the petitioner. If the police officers had been little more careful in discharge of their duties, the petitioner would not have been deprived of his liberty. Police is the main stay of the Administration of the State. It has a duty to ensure that outlaws are firmly dealt with in accordance with law. But it must confirm to the rules of law and the mandate of the Constitution of India in its functions and if it would go beyond the law to do anything in the name of Administration, it would shake the very foundation of a Constitutional democracy.”

The Bench further held that the case of the petitioner is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution under the Public Law Remedy.

Advocate Sumit Prakash represented the petitioner while G.A. Manoj Kumar and Advocate Manoj Tandon represented the respondents.

In this case, a petition was filed for a direction upon the State to pay compensation to the petitioner for his illegal detention of approximately four months and the prayer was also made for instituting an FIR against the erring police officials. The counsel for the petitioner submitted before the court that an FIR was lodged regarding the case wherein the body of one lady, aged about 25 years, seemed to be a married lady was found.

It was further submitted that the lady was killed somewhere else and her dead body was burnt and that the petitioner was falsely implicated in such a case. He further contended that while rejecting the bail application, the court categorically observed that there was no iota of evidence except the confessional statement and that the petitioner and other co-accused were taken from one place to another and were brutally tortured by the police who asked them to confess that they raped and killed the said woman.

The High Court after considering the submissions of the counsel observed, “… it is crystal clear that for the lackadaisical attitude of the State Police to arrest anyone and put him in police custody has made this petitioner to suffer the said humiliation. The cries of the human justice when he feels that the insensible act has crucified his self-respect and the petitioner, who was having a bright career and completed Staff Selection Commission Exam, thus the petitioner was illegally kept in judicial custody between 14.02.2014 to 27.07.2014 period for a crime, which has not been committed by this petitioner, who happened to be a student at that time and if the illegal detention is proved, in view of the above judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the compensation under the Public Law Remedy can be granted by the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”

The Court noted that admittedly, the petitioner was illegally arrested and thereafter was discharged on the submission of the final form by the police, hence, the case of compensation is made out.

“As such, the respondent-State through respondent No. 4 shall pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (rupees five lakhs) in favour of the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receipt / production of this order, as a compensation for illegally detaining the petitioner into the custody for the aforesaid period”, directed the Court.

The Court said that it is open for the State to recover the said amount from the salary of the erring police officers, for whom act, the petitioner was languishing in jail if they were found guilty. It concluded that the trauma, already faced by the petitioner as well as humiliation in society cannot be restored by way of compensation but the same will console the petitioner to forget the past and take life onwards in the future.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the plea.

Cause Title- Ajit Kumar v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Judgment