15 Jan 2010
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: CRL.A. No. 176/1995
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2010-0002South East Delhi, DelhiJudgment 15 January 2010
State vs Govindpuri Police Sub-Inspector
The Delhi High Court set aside SI 's trial-court acquittal and convicted him of culpable homicide not amounting to murder for the custodial death of theft suspect [name withheld]. Picked up from his Govindpuri jhuggi on 19 September 1986 in FIR 365/1986, the victim, who had no injuries when picked up, suffered nine injuries in custody and died of coma caused by a head blow; the respondent admitted the deceased was in his custody throughout. The Court rejected the TB and jeep-jerk defences and the sanction objection, holding the officer resorted to third-degree methods to extract a confession. It imposed 10 years RI plus Rs 55,000 fine (Rs 50,000 to the closest relative; six months RI in default). 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 →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 15 January 2010 in CRL.A. No. 176/1995, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajit Bharihoke, JJ.) recorded the conviction of the Sub-Inspector, P.S. Sriniwaspuri, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 50,000.
- Register number
- DL 03 CW 0008
- Case reference
- CRL.A. No. 176/1995
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajit Bharihoke, JJ.), 15 January 2010
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Sub-Inspector, P.S. Sriniwaspuri
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The result of the above discussion is that the impugned judgment of acquittal is set aside and the respondent is convicted for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part 1 IPC.” (at para 37)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction entered by High Court. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 10 years. Compensation: Rs 50,000.
- 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.
Current position
The Delhi High Court judgment dated 15 January 2010 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
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.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“The result of the above discussion is that the impugned judgment of acquittal is set aside and the respondent is convicted for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part 1 IPC.” (para 37)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
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.