CW-2009-0033Chennai, Tamil NaduJudgment 5 November 2009

Chennai Man vs The Secretary to Government and Others

The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. Inspector challenged the recovery of Rs.76,000 from his salary toward the Rs.3.8 lakh compensation paid to Tmt. Meena for the 1993 custodial death of her husband [name withheld] at the E-2 Royapettah lock-up. The court found that the earlier compensation order fixing joint tort responsibility on five policemen, with liberty to recover from them, had become final without appeal and after hearing him. The court held that neither his criminal acquittal nor the quashing of departmental proceedings could defeat the tort recovery. The writ petition was dismissed with no costs. 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 5 November 2009 in W.P. No.12599 of 2009, the Madras High Court (Coram: K. Chandru, J.) returned findings adverse to the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 3.8 lakh (Rs 3,80,000).

Register number
TN 01 CW 0007
Case reference
W.P. No.12599 of 2009
Court and date
Madras High Court (Coram: K. Chandru, J.), 5 November 2009
Officer(s) at the material time
Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Finding of the Court (extract)
“The payment of compensation arose out of a tort liability of the State in which the petitioner also had a joint responsibility in compensating for such tortious acts.” (at para 9)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 3.8 lakh (Rs 3,80,000).
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 Madras High Court judgment dated 5 November 2009 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
Custodial deathPrimary
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.

“The payment of compensation arose out of a tort liability of the State in which the petitioner also had a joint responsibility in compensating for such tortious acts.” (para 9)

Institutional response

1
5 Nov 2009

Order issued

Concluded
Madras High Court External · Binding

The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 380,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: W.P. No.12599 of 2009
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.