The younger deceased was seven years old per the court's findings (paras 2, 7) — standing on his house terrace; the 17-year-old was not part of the active mob. Remove '(8)'/'(17)' duplications. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
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 →By judgment dated 22 August 2005, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Coram: R.V. Raveendran, A.K. Patnaik, Dipak Misra, JJ.) returned findings adverse to the accused police personnel, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 4 lakh (Rs 4,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment dated 22 August 2005 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
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.
Holding not recorded separately.
“In our considered view the death had occurred due to recklessness of the police.” (para 8)
The Madhya Pradesh High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 400,000.
(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.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.
