# Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2017-0013](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2017-0013)

## 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.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158287279/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2017-0013)

**Record:** CW-2017-0013 (compiler id CWC-0098); case DELHI-007
**Title:** Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State
**Court:** Delhi High Court; bench: Division Bench: S. Muralidhar and I.S. Mehta JJ. (judgment authored by Muralidhar J.); judges: S. Muralidhar; I.S. Mehta
**Case number / citation:** Crl.A. Nos. 74, 88, 89, 91, 106 and 118 of 2001 / 246 (2018) DLT 35
**Judgment:** 2017-12-14 (2017, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1995-07-30 (1995)
**Place:** North East Delhi, Delhi; city town: Shahdara; police station or unit: Special Staff (North-East), Delhi Police (FIR 231/1995, PS Welcome); force: state_police
**Category:** Violence & unlawful detention
**Sub-category:** custodial death
**Outcome:** Conviction upheld (conviction_upheld)
**Sections:** IPC 304 Part II; IPC 34; IPC 452; IPC 365
**Officers (gated display forms):** 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 (6 in record)
**Victims:** Shahdara man (1 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** imprisonment; max 8 yrs
**Sentence type:** imprisonment (imprisonment)

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.

> 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 fatal injuries.

**Sources (2):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158287279/); [livelaw.in](https://www.livelaw.in/delhi-hc-uphold-conviction-six-policemen-custodial-death-case-says-not-much-changed-since-d-k-basu-judgment)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** brutality
**admin subcategory:** custodial_death
**allegations:** {'category': 'Custodial death', 'primary': True, 'position': 'Material fact supported', 'position_explainer': 'Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.', 'official_finding_relation': 'supports allegation'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** 91
**display title redacted:** Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs State
**followup history:** {'date': '2026-09-19', 'scope': 'Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass', 'method': 'skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)', 'result': 'holds', 'corrections_applied': \['court_quote_para', 'bench'\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': None, 'action_type': 'Conviction', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation', 'source': '246 (2018) DLT 35', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}; {'date': '2017-12-14', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Delhi High Court', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)', 'source': '246 (2018) DLT 35', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/158287279/', 'link_checked': None}; {'url': 'https://www.livelaw.in/delhi-hc-uphold-conviction-six-policemen-custodial-death-case-says-not-much-changed-since-d-k-basu-judgment', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** custodial death
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** Primary judgment verified: 6 policemen's culpability upheld; 302/34 converted to 304-II/34, 8 years RI each.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Conviction upheld.

[Open CW-2017-0013](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2017-0013)