a 17-year-old girl, aged about 17, was arrested in FIR 51/2016 at Suhagpura (Pratapgarh) for killing her husband, transferred by the Juvenile for trial as an adult, convicted under Section 302 IPC by the Sessions Judge, and lodged in adult prison for nearly three years. The entire investigation was conducted by SHO with no Special Juvenile Police Unit officer and no woman police personnel associated, contrary to the JJ Act mandate. The Rajasthan High Court Division Bench held the Section 15 transfer, the investigation, and the incarceration in adult jail patently illegal and acquitted her. The court held the irregular investigation and unwarranted imprisonment grossly violated her fundamental rights and directed the State to pay Rs 2,00,000 compensation. 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 15 April 2019 in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 27/2019, the Rajasthan High Court (Coram: Sandeep Mehta, Vinit Kumar Mathur, JJ.) returned findings adverse to the SHO, Police Station Suhagpura, Pratapgarh, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 2 lakh (Rs 2,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Rajasthan High Court judgment dated 15 April 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.
“As per Rule 86(5) of the Model Rules, it is a mandate of law that for dealing with the girl child, woman police personnel shall be engaged. However, on a perusal of the entire record, it is clear that neither …” (para n/a)
The Rajasthan High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.
(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.
