CW-2017-0009Murshidabad, West BengalJudgment 6 September 2017

Raninagar Man vs The State of West Bengal and Others

A Raninagar man (18) died in police custody on 15 February 2014, taken into custody in the afternoon and found dead the same evening, with the State claiming he hanged himself in the male-lockup latrine and opposing compensation citing a pending criminal proceeding. His widow [name withheld] limited her writ claim to compensation for custodial death. The Calcutta High Court held custody at the time of death was established, distinguished Dalbir Singh, and held the pending case did not denude her right to compensation. It directed the State to pay Rs 3 lakh within six weeks, leaving other heirs free to claim further compensation before the appropriate forum. District and police station are per the interim order and HRW report (Raninagar PS, Murshidabad); the final judgment names no station. 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 6 September 2017 in W.P. No. 16457 (W) of 2015, the Calcutta High Court (Coram: Debangsu Basak, J.) returned findings adverse to the accused police personnel, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 3 lakh (Rs 3,00,000).

Register number
WB 57 CW 0001
Case reference
W.P. No. 16457 (W) of 2015
Court and date
Calcutta High Court (Coram: Debangsu Basak, J.), 6 September 2017
Officer(s) at the material time
Not identified in the cited sources (Raninagar Police Station area (per interim order; final judgment names no PS))
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Finding of the Court (extract)
“The death occurred at the time when the accused was admittedly in the custody of the police on such date. The explanation and justification of the cause of death are issues, which are to be considered in the appropriate criminal …” (at para n/a)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 3 lakh (Rs 3,00,000).
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 Calcutta High Court judgment dated 6 September 2017 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 death occurred at the time when the accused was admittedly in the custody of the police on such date. The explanation and justification of the cause of death are issues, which are to be considered in the appropriate criminal …” (para n/a)

Institutional response

1
6 Sep 2017

Order issued

Concluded
Calcutta High Court External · Binding

The Calcutta High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 300,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: W.P. No. 16457 (W) of 2015
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.