CW-1992-0002Nagpur, MaharashtraJudgment 15 February 1992

Sham Kant v. State of Maharashtra

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of acting Sub-Inspector Sham Kant, Station House Officer of Ramtek, and confirmed his conviction under Section 330 IPC for torturing temple-theft suspects a Ramtek man and a Ramtek man in police custody between 25 June and 1 July 1980. The Court accepted the survivor's account of stripping, beatings and sexual torture with an iron rod, corroborated by jail and medical records, after which a Ramtek man died of complications from 23 injuries. It rejected the challenge to the High Court's reversal of the trial court's acquittal and its dismissal of a clean-chit inquiry commission report. The Court confirmed the sentence of nine months' rigorous imprisonment with a Rs. 2,000 fine, observing it was very lenient. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 15 February 1992 in Criminal Appeal arising from Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 1982, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. R. Pandian, K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Sham Kant (Acting Sub-Inspector (Station House Officer)).

Register number
MH 31 CW 0003
Case reference
Criminal Appeal arising from Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) Criminal Appeal No. 93 of 1982 / 1992 Supp (2) SCC 521; AIR 1992 SC 1879
Court and date
Supreme Court of India (Coram: S. R. Pandian, K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ.), 15 February 1992
Officer(s) at the material time
Sham Kant (Acting Sub-Inspector (Station House Officer))
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 330 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“After carefully scanning through the evidence of PW 2, 7, 13.19, 20, 23, 25, 29 and the various documents Exts.21, 22 and 34, we have no reservation in coming to the conclusion that a Ramtek man and a Ramtek man …” (at para 27)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 0.75 years.
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Supreme Court of India judgment dated 15 February 1992 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
Custodial torturePrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“After carefully scanning through the evidence of PW 2, 7, 13.19, 20, 23, 25, 29 and the various documents Exts.21, 22 and 34, we have no reservation in coming to the conclusion that a Ramtek man and a Ramtek man …” (para 27)

Institutional response

2
Date not established

Conviction

Concluded
Trial court (as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment) External · Binding

The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.

Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: 1992 Supp (2) SCC 521; AIR 1992 SC 1879
Not yet re-checked.
15 Feb 1992

Order issued

Concluded
Supreme Court of India External · Binding

The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.

Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: 1992 Supp (2) SCC 521; AIR 1992 SC 1879
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.