Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.
The hospital affidavit records that a Nagoor man, brought by escort police for a preliminary check-up before lodgment in prison on the night of 31.12.2013, was conscious, stuttering and inebriated, then collapsed and died at 1.15 a.m.; the post-mortem recorded three external injuries and opined shock as the cause of death (paras 1-2). The petitioner, co-convenor of the Campaign for Custodial Justice and Abolition of Torture, sought an enquiry by a retired District Judge into the custodial torture and death. The Division Bench noted the Government Order dated 25.07.2015 sanctioning Rs.5,00,000 relief to the family and directed structured disbursal (Rs.2 lakh wife deposit, Rs.1 lakh per child deposit, Rs.1 lakh immediate release) (paras 3-4). It recorded that Inspector of Nagoor Police Station had exceeded his powers and used unwarranted force, noting the magisterial enquiry findings, his suspension, and the decision to initiate criminal and departmental proceedings (para 5). The writ petition was disposed of and listed for compliance on 09.10.2015 (paras 6-7). 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 28 July 2015 in W.P.No.18154 of 2014, the Madras High Court (Coram: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, T.S. Sivagnanam, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Inspector of Police, Nagoor Police Station; Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagoor Police Station, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 5 lakh (Rs 5,00,000).
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 28 July 2015 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 so far as the fate of Tr.[name withheld] is concerned, who was the then Inspector of Police, Nagoor Police Station, who has exceeded his powers and has used unwarranted force” (para 5)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.
(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.