CW-2017-0014Budaun, Uttar PradeshJudgment 18 December 2017

State of U.P. v. Kunwargaon Police Sub-Inspector / Station House Officer & Ors.

The judgment of the Allahabad High Court records the following account. A Kunwargaon man was picked up from his field on 5 September 1994 by Station House Officer's party and detained in the Kunwargaon police lock-up for nearly a week without being challaned in any case, during which he was regularly beaten. On 12 September 1994 kerosene was poured on him and he was set ablaze inside the police station, dying of extensive burn injuries. Independent shopkeepers opposite the station and a co-detenu supported the illegal detention and beating, and the deceased told his cousin that the SO had burnt him. The Special Judge (PC Act) acquitted all eight policemen in 2002, but the High Court held the trial court had committed a grave miscarriage of justice, reversed the SHO's acquittal and convicted him under Sections 302, 343 and 220 IPC, sentencing him to life imprisonment with fines, while affirming the acquittal of the seven constables. 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 18 December 2017 in Government Appeal No. 3448 of 2002, the Allahabad High Court (Coram: Arun Tandon, Rajul Bhargava, JJ.) recorded the conviction of the Sub-Inspector / Station House Officer, PS Kunwargaon, Budaun.

Register number
UP 24 CW 0001
Case reference
Government Appeal No. 3448 of 2002
Court and date
Allahabad High Court (Coram: Arun Tandon, Rajul Bhargava, JJ.), 18 December 2017
Officer(s) at the material time
Sub-Inspector / Station House Officer, PS Kunwargaon, Budaun
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 343 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 220 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“This State appeal is allowed against respondent no.1-[name withheld] and he is held guilty for an offence punishable under Section 302, 343, 220 IPC.” (at para 50)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Conviction entered by High Court. Sentence: imprisonment and fine.
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 Allahabad High Court judgment dated 18 December 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.

“This State appeal is allowed against respondent no.1-[name withheld] and he is held guilty for an offence punishable under Section 302, 343, 220 IPC.” (para 50)

Institutional response

1
18 Dec 2017

Order issued

Concluded
Allahabad High Court External · Binding

The Allahabad High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.

Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: Government Appeal No. 3448 of 2002
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.