Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: 246 (2018) DLT 35
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2017-0013North East Delhi, DelhiJudgment 14 December 2017
Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State
The Delhi High Court (S. Muralidhar, J.) upheld the culpability of six Special Staff (North-East) policemen for the custodial killing of a Shahdara man Raided past midnight on 30/31 July 1995 over suspected illegal arms, he was beaten inside his house, while being dragged, on Shahdara flyover and at the Special Staff office, then handed to acquaintances instead of hospital; he died on 8 August 1995 of a traumatic head injury. The Court rejected the hypertension/fall defences and held Section 34 proved for the pre-planned team, but converted the murder convictions to Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 since the fatal blow could not be pinned on one accused, sentencing each to eight years' rigorous imprisonment concurrently, cancelling bail and ordering surrender forthwith. 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 →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 14 December 2017 in Crl.A. Nos. 74, 88, 89, 91, 106 and 118 of 2001, the Delhi High Court (Coram: S. Muralidhar, I.S. Mehta, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of 6 police personnel, namely: Sub-Inspector, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Head Constable, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Head Constable, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 05 CW 0019
- Case reference
- Crl.A. Nos. 74, 88, 89, 91, 106 and 118 of 2001 / 246 (2018) DLT 35
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: S. Muralidhar, I.S. Mehta, JJ.), 14 December 2017
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Sub-Inspector, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Head Constable, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Head Constable, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police; Police personnel, Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The Court is satisfied that although the culpability of the accused for the homicidal death of the deceased has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the evidence of the prosecution does not precisely point out which of the accused caused the …” (at para 91)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 8 years.
- 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.
Current position
The Delhi High Court judgment dated 14 December 2017 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
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.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“The Court is satisfied that although the culpability of the accused for the homicidal death of the deceased has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the evidence of the prosecution does not precisely point out which of the accused caused the …” (para 91)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
14 Dec 2017
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: 246 (2018) DLT 35
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
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.