The judgment of the Karnataka High Court records the following account. A Bengaluru man was picked up around midnight on 23 June 2006 by Indiranagar police in a theft case; his mother was falsely told at Malur Police Station that he was not arrested, and he was kept in custody without production before the jurisdictional Magistrate within 24 hours, with Rs.5,000 allegedly demanded for his release. The detenu was produced on 29 June 2006, and the Registrar (Vigilance) reported illegal detention with discrepant affidavits and Station House Diary entries. The Division Bench held the detention illegal and violative of Article 21, directed the State to pay Rs.10,000 compensation within two weeks (recoverable from the officials), directed the Registrar General to file a criminal complaint against the SI and two constables for false affidavits, and directed the Commissioner of Police to hold a departmental enquiry. 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 23 August 2006 in W.P. No. 62/2006 (HC) (habeas corpus), the Karnataka High Court (Coram: R. Gururajan, N. Ananda, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 3 police personnel, namely: Sub-Inspector, Indira Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru; Police Constable, Indira Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru; Police Constable, Indira Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 10,000.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Karnataka High Court judgment dated 23 August 2006 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.
“the detenue was kept under illegal detention” (para 8)
The Karnataka High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 10,000.
(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.
