The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. A Keeriparai man was picked up from his home by Kadayanallur police on 28.11.2005 and handed to Aralvaimozhi police the same day for enquiry in a dacoity case. The Court found he was kept in illegal custody at Keeriparai Police Station till 30.11.2005, tortured to death by third-degree methods, and his body disposed of to escape a murder charge, as established by the CBCID report, the RDO enquiry and G.O.Ms.No.1322. Relying on the State's own counter and the CBCID findings, the Court held his arrest and illegal custody proved and his human and fundamental rights grossly violated. It directed the State to pay Rs.7,86,000 compensation with 6% interest from 23.11.2009 within eight weeks, leaving the pending criminal trial (PRC No.58 of 2009) and civil remedies open.
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 1 July 2011 in W.P.(MD) No.8138 of 2008 & M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2008, the Madras High Court (Coram: D. Hariparanthaman, J.) returned findings adverse to 13 police personnel, namely: Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil Town, Kanyakumari District; Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Nagercoil; Inspector of Police, Vadaseri Police Station, Nagercoil; Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Police Station, Tirunelveli District; Head Constable No.1691, Aralvoimozhi Police Station; Head Constable, Aralvoimozhi Police Station; Head Constable, Aralvoimozhi Police Station; Head Constable No.1568, Aralvoimozhi Police Station; Head Constable, Aralvoimozhi Police Station; Inspector of Police, Aralvaimozhi Police Station; Sub-Inspector, Rajakamangalam Police Station; Inspector of Police, Pudur Police Station; Sub-Inspector (retired), Economic Offences, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 7.9 lakh (Rs 7,86,000).
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 1 July 2011 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 these circumstances, I have no hesitation to hold that human rights and fundamental rights of the husband of the petitioner was grossly violated.” (para 16)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 786,000.
(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.
