A Division Bench of the Madras High Court (A.P. Shah, C.J. and Prabha Sridevan, J.) allowed the Coimbatore Bar Association's petition for a disabled practising advocate (post-brain-surgery, low vision) who was kicked and beaten on 14 December 2006 by woman Constable and striking-force constables at the town bus stand and again at the All Women Police Station, with a false modesty-outrage case foisted on him. Accepting retired Justice K.P. Sivasubramaniam's Commissioner report, the court held respondents 5 to 7 had beaten the advocate mercilessly and violated his human rights with impunity. It awarded Rs.50,000 compensation to the second petitioner, recoverable by the State from respondents 5 to 7. 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 29 April 2008 in W.P. No. 716 of 2007, the Madras High Court (Coram: A.P. Shah, Prabha Sridevan, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 3 police personnel, namely: Police Constable (R5), All Women Police Station, Coimbatore; Police Constable (R6), All Women Police Station / B-3 Police Station, Coimbatore; Police Constable (R7), Coimbatore City police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 50,000.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Madras High Court judgment dated 29 April 2008 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.
“Though the incident was triggered off by the second Petitioner dashing against the fifth Respondent due to his low vision, there is no justification for the behaviour of the police personnel in having beaten him mercilessly, especially Respondents 5, 6 …” (para 9)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.
(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.
