An Arakkandanallur man @ an Arakkandanallur man, aged 26, arrested in a prohibition case and detained in the Arakkandanallur police lock-up, was found dead on 5 August 2006 and declared brought dead at the Government Hospital. The family alleged custodial violence; the State contended suicide by hanging due to police negligence. A Revenue Divisional Officer inquiry examining 45 persons concluded suicide without custodial violence but fixed negligence on one Sub-Inspector and two Head Constables, who were suspended and faced criminal proceedings (later quashed in 2014). The Court held it admitted that the deceased died an unnatural death in police custody, applied Supreme Court precedents on State liability, and allowed the writ, quantifying fair compensation at Rs. 3,00,000 less Rs. 1,00,000 already paid, with 9% interest on default. 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 7 November 2019 in W.P. No. 18315 of 2010, the Madras High Court (Coram: V. Bharathidasan, J.) returned findings adverse to 3 police personnel, namely: Sub-Inspector, Arakkandanallur Police Station, Villupuram; Head Constable, Arakkandanallur Police Station, Villupuram; Head Constable, Arakkandanallur Police Station, Villupuram, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 3 lakh (Rs 3,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Madras High Court judgment dated 7 November 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.
“Since the deceased died while he was in the custody of the police in connection with a criminal case and the death was unnatural, the petitioners are entitled for compensation.” (para 18)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 300,000.
(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.
