The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) allowed the writ petition of Shivabai, holding that her husband [name withheld] was illegally detained at Bhada Police Station from 19-12-2005 without arrest record and died in custody on 20-12-2005. The court rejected the police story that he hanged himself in the toilet during a 5-minute load-shedding blackout, finding illegal detention, violation of personal liberty, and dereliction of duty by the police. It directed the State to pay Rs 5,00,000 compensation within two months (9% interest on default) with liberty to recover from the defaulting Bhada staff after inquiry, and noted the pending prosecution of the four officers under Sections 306, 218 read with 34 IPC (Crime No. 16 of 2006). The prosecution in Crime No. 16 of 2006 (Sections 306 and 218 read with 34 IPC) against the respondent officers was pending before the trial court; this writ granted Rs 5 lakh State compensation with recovery from defaulting staff after inquiry, recording no finding against any individual. 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 31 July 2017 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 251 of 2007, the Bombay High Court (Coram: Sunil K. Kotwal, T. V. Nalawade, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 4 police personnel, namely: Police Sub-Inspector, Bhada Police Station; Assistant Sub-Inspector, Bhada Police Station; Police Constable, Bhada Police Station; Police Constable, Bhada 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 Bombay High Court judgment dated 31 July 2017 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.
“Thus, obviously the detention of husband of the petitioner by Respondent Nos.6 to 9 at Police Station Bhada was illegal and the custodial death of deceased [name withheld] resulted only due to high handedness and dereliction of duty by police.” (para 8)
The Bombay 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.
