{
 "record_id": "CW-2022-0035",
 "status": "current",
 "merged_id": "CWC-0855",
 "alias_merged_ids": [],
 "display_title": "Dharapuram Man vs State of Tamil Nadu and Others",
 "display_title_redacted": "Dharapuram Man vs State of Tamil Nadu and Others",
 "state": "Tamil Nadu",
 "district": "Tiruppur",
 "district_at_time": null,
 "city_town": "Dharapuram",
 "police_station_or_unit": "Dharapuram Police Station",
 "court": "Madras High Court",
 "court_as_verified": "Madras High Court",
 "bench": null,
 "case_title": "Dharapuram Man vs State of Tamil Nadu and Others",
 "case_number": "W.P. Nos. 22431 and 22527 of 2021",
 "citation": "2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 490",
 "judges": [
  "R. Subramanian",
  "K. Kumaresh Babu"
 ],
 "judgment_date": "2022-11-29",
 "date_precision": "day",
 "judgment_year": 2022,
 "incident_date": "2020-02-29",
 "incident_year": 2020,
 "category": "Custodial torture",
 "admin_category": "brutality",
 "admin_subcategory": "custodial_torture",
 "subcategory": "custodial_torture",
 "subcategory_display": "custodial torture",
 "protest_override_heuristic": false,
 "outcome_type": "adverse_finding_compensation",
 "sections": [
  "IPC 294(b)",
  "IPC 323",
  "IPC 506(ii)"
 ],
 "officers": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Sub-Inspector of Police",
   "role": "held_liable",
   "unit": "Dharapuram Police Station",
   "publish_grade": "unnamed",
   "gate_reasons": [
    "ledger:no_row",
    "key2:no_row"
   ],
   "ledger_role": null,
   "key2": null,
   "key2_agy": null,
   "key2_claude": null,
   "key2_union": null,
   "key2_gemapi": null,
   "key2_openrouter": null,
   "key2_gpt56": null,
   "grok": null,
   "jev_risk": null,
   "jev_p_culpable": null,
   "key2_gpt": null,
   "later_outcome": null,
   "name_public": null,
   "display": "Sub-Inspector of Police, Dharapuram Police Station"
  }
 ],
 "officer_count": 1,
 "victims": [
  {
   "age": null,
   "gender": "male",
   "name": null,
   "descriptor": "Dharapuram man"
  }
 ],
 "victims_redacted": null,
 "anonymised": false,
 "victim_count": 1,
 "sentence_type": "compensation_only",
 "sentence_max_years": null,
 "compensation_inr": 500000,
 "force": "state_police",
 "primary_source_url": "https://livelaw-hpnlu.refread.com/pdf_upload/490-l-muruganandam-v-state-29-nov-2022-448050.pdf",
 "secondary_sources": [
  "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1219499/l-muruganantham-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-others/",
  "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=2025/july/l-muruganantham-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-36"
 ],
 "summary": "The Madras High Court partly allowed the writ petition of a Dharapuram man, an advocate with 80% locomotor disability, and dismissed the erring Sub-Inspector's challenge. The court found his arrest on 29.02.2020 by the Dharapuram police violated the D.K. Basu and Arnesh Kumar guidelines and that he was slapped and harassed in custody. It held the SHRC's Rs 1 lakh award wholly insufficient and enhanced compensation to Rs 5 lakh, with Rs 4 lakh borne by the State and Rs 1 lakh recoverable from the officer. It retained the direction to take disciplinary action against the Sub-Inspector and awarded Rs 25,000 costs; the Supreme Court affirmed on 15.07.2025. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.",
 "summary_verified": "The Madras High Court partly allowed the writ petition of a Dharapuram man, an advocate with 80% locomotor disability, and dismissed the erring Sub-Inspector's challenge. The court found his arrest on 29.02.2020 by the Dharapuram police violated the D.K. Basu and Arnesh Kumar guidelines and that he was slapped and harassed in custody. It held the SHRC's Rs 1 lakh award wholly insufficient and enhanced compensation to Rs 5 lakh, with Rs 4 lakh borne by the State and Rs 1 lakh recoverable from the officer. It retained the direction to take disciplinary action against the Sub-Inspector and awarded Rs 25,000 costs; the Supreme Court affirmed on 15.07.2025.",
 "court_quote": "The very casual manner in which the officer replied to our query, as to whether, he had read the judgment in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another shocks us. Such replies will reflect upon the entire Police Force.",
 "court_quote_para": "37",
 "confidence": "high",
 "verdict": "accept",
 "verdict_note": "Primary PDF verified: Rs 5L compensation (Rs 4L State + Rs 1L recovery from SI), officer's writ dismissed.",
 "verification_status": "V2",
 "verification_badge": "V2 · Externally reported",
 "tier_badge": "Externally reported",
 "tier": "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded",
 "tier_history": [
  "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded"
 ],
 "allegations": [
  {
   "category": "Custodial torture",
   "primary": true,
   "position": "Material fact supported",
   "position_explainer": "Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.",
   "official_finding_relation": "supports allegation"
  }
 ],
 "institutional_response": [
  {
   "date": "2022-11-29",
   "action_type": "Order issued",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Madras High Court",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.",
   "disposition": "Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only)",
   "source": "2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 490",
   "recheck": "Not yet re-checked."
  }
 ],
 "later_proceedings": [],
 "final_outcome_url": null,
 "followup_history": [
  {
   "date": "2026-09-19",
   "scope": "Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass",
   "method": "skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)",
   "result": "holds",
   "corrections_applied": []
  }
 ],
 "followup_status": "checked",
 "last_checked": "2026-09-19",
 "link_checked_per_url": [
  {
   "url": "https://livelaw-hpnlu.refread.com/pdf_upload/490-l-muruganandam-v-state-29-nov-2022-448050.pdf",
   "link_checked": null
  },
  {
   "url": "https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1219499/l-muruganantham-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-others/",
   "link_checked": null
  },
  {
   "url": "https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/judgments/index.php?go=2025/july/l-muruganantham-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-36",
   "link_checked": null
  }
 ],
 "source_assessment": {
  "established": null,
  "basis": null
 },
 "v3_basis": null,
 "publication_basis": null,
 "reviews": [],
 "retracted": {
  "is_retracted": false
 },
 "fidelity_checked": true,
 "verified_by": [
  "chunk-69"
 ],
 "merged_case_id": "GAP2-40-005",
 "officers_named_public": 0,
 "record_flag": null,
 "service": "police",
 "watch": "babuwatch"
}