CW-2012-0009Kakching, ManipurJudgment 5 June 2012

The Chief Secretary, Government of Manipur and Others vs Smt. Naorem Ongbi Rashmani Devi and Others

The Gauhati High Court (Imphal Bench) dismissed the State of Manipur's regular first appeal, affirming a civil court decree awarding Rs 7,20,000 with 6% annual interest for the custodial death of a Kakching man Singh was arrested from his home on 29 July 1991 by an ASI-led police party and taken to Kakching Police Station, where he was tortured in the lockup, and his dead body was subsequently found floating in Kharungpat lake on 2 August 1991. The High Court rejected the police's fabricated claim that Singh had escaped from custody, holding that the State was vicariously liable for the wrongful and tortious acts of its police officers. 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 June 2012 in Regular First Appeal No. 3 of 2009, the Gauhati High Court (Coram: T. Nandakumar Singh, N. Kotiswar Singh, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Assistant Sub-Inspector, Kakching Police Station; Inspector, Kakching Police Station, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 7.2 lakh (Rs 7,20,000).

Register number
MN 00 CW 0003
Case reference
Regular First Appeal No. 3 of 2009 / AIR 2012 Guw 113
Court and date
Gauhati High Court (Coram: T. Nandakumar Singh, N. Kotiswar Singh, JJ.), 5 June 2012
Officer(s) at the material time
Assistant Sub-Inspector, Kakching Police Station; Inspector, Kakching Police Station
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 330 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 331 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“The learned Trial Court after appreciation of the statements of D.Ws. held that the defendants had utterly failed to prove that (late) a Kakching man, escaped from police custody and further held that (late) a Kakching man died in the …” (at para 11)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 7.2 lakh (Rs 7,20,000).
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 Gauhati High Court judgment dated 5 June 2012 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 learned Trial Court after appreciation of the statements of D.Ws. held that the defendants had utterly failed to prove that (late) a Kakching man, escaped from police custody and further held that (late) a Kakching man died in the …” (para 11)

Institutional response

1
5 Jun 2012

Order issued

Concluded
Gauhati High Court External · Binding

The Gauhati High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 720,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: AIR 2012 Guw 113
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.