The judgment of the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) records the following account. The petitioner, a Pardhi-community woman of Jintur (Parbhani, Maharashtra), alleged her husband, a farmer, was picked up without stated reason by Karnataka police from Parbhani railway station on 14 October 2018 along with his car, gold ornaments and cash, kept at Bhalki (Rural) police station till 24 October 2018, and subjected to third-degree torture. The Bhalki police replied that he was picked up at Parbhani only on 23 October 2018 in Crime No.18 of 2018, produced before the Bhalki Circle Inspector that night and formally arrested on 24 October 2018, denying torture or seizure of valuables. The Court held that even on the police's own case the detention from 23 October 2018 till production before the Bhalki Magistrate on 24 October 2018 was illegal and unauthorised, called the 14-October version also probable, allowed the petition, and directed the Karnataka respondents to pay Rs.50,000 compensation within 45 days (8% interest on default). It sent copies to both State governments, expected departmental inquiry and action, and permitted recovery from the officers concerned. 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 17 October 2019 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1778 of 2018, the Bombay High Court (Coram: T.V. Nalawade, K.K. Sonawane, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Circle Police Inspector, Bidar, Karnataka; Police, Bhalki (Rural) Police Station, Bidar, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 50,000.
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 17 October 2019 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.
“The Karnataka police (Respondent Nos.4 to 6) are hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the husband of Petitioner.” (para Order II)
The Bombay High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.
(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.
