# Cuttack Police Inspector v. State of Orissa; \[name withheld\] v. State of Orissa

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2020-0009](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2020-0009)

## Report card

By judgment dated 9 November 2020 in CRA Nos. 207 and 210 of 1988, the Orissa High Court (Coram: S.K. Sahoo, J.) affirmed the conviction of 2 police personnel, namely: Inspector, Purighat Police Station, Cuttack; Sub-Inspector, Purighat Police Station, Cuttack, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 3 lakh (Rs 3,00,000).

- Register number: OD 05 CW 0005
- Case reference: CRA Nos. 207 and 210 of 1988
- Court and date: Orissa High Court (Coram: S.K. Sahoo, J.), 9 November 2020
- Officer(s) at the material time: Inspector, Purighat Police Station, Cuttack; Sub-Inspector, Purighat Police Station, Cuttack
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract): “I have also held that there are some irregular features in the preparation of seizure list Ext.23/3 and the contents of seizure list Ext.42 are false.” (at para 12)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum: Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 1 year. Compensation: Rs 3 lakh (Rs 3,00,000).
- 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/162192708/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2020-0009)

**Record:** CW-2020-0009 (compiler id CWC-0501); case SWDERELI-011
**Title:** Cuttack Police Inspector v. State of Orissa; \[name withheld\] v. State of Orissa
**Court:** Orissa High Court; judges: S.K. Sahoo
**Case number / citation:** CRA Nos. 207 and 210 of 1988
**Judgment:** 2020-11-09 (2020, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1985-05-04 (1985)
**Place:** Cuttack, Odisha; city town: Cuttack; police station or unit: Purighat Police Station; force: state_police
**Category:** Violence & unlawful detention
**Sub-category:** custodial death
**Outcome:** Conviction upheld (conviction_upheld)
**Sections:** IPC 323; IPC 324; IPC 471; IPC 34
**Officers (gated display forms):** Inspector, Purighat Police Station, Cuttack; Sub-Inspector, Purighat Police Station, Cuttack (2 in record)
**Victims:** Cuttack man; Cuttack resident (2 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** mixed; max 1 yrs; Rs 3 lakh (Rs 3,00,000)
**Sentence type:** mixed (mixed)

The High Court partly allowed the appeals of an Inspector and a Sub-Inspector of Purighat station in the 1985 custodial-death case of a Cuttack man: it set aside the Section 304-II/34 and 342/34 convictions for want of proof but upheld the Section 323/34 and 471/34 convictions for using false seizure lists as genuine, additionally convicting both under Section 324/34. Both officers were ordered to surrender within two weeks to serve the concurrent sentences (maximum one year). The Court also awarded Rs.3 lakh compensation to the deceased's legal representatives for the custodial violence. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

> I have also held that there are some irregular features in the preparation of seizure list Ext.23/3 and the contents of seizure list Ext.42 are false.

**Sources (2):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/162192708/); [livelaw.in](https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/custodial-violence-orissa-hc-directs-septuagenarian-ex-cops-to-serve-imprisonment-in-35-year-old-custodial-death-case-165741)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** misconduct
**admin subcategory:** custodial_death
**allegations:** {'category': 'Other', '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:** 12
**display title redacted:** Cuttack Police Inspector v. State of Orissa; \[name withheld\] v. State of Orissa
**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': 'wrong_facts', 'corrections_applied': \['subcategory'\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': None, 'action_type': 'Conviction', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Trial court (as recorded in the Orissa High Court judgment)', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Orissa High Court judgment.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation', 'source': 'CRA Nos. 207 and 210 of 1988', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}; {'date': '2020-11-09', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Orissa High Court', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Orissa High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)', 'source': 'CRA Nos. 207 and 210 of 1988', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/162192708/', 'link_checked': None}; {'url': 'https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/custodial-violence-orissa-hc-directs-septuagenarian-ex-cops-to-serve-imprisonment-in-35-year-old-custodial-death-case-165741', '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:** HC judgment text verified; 304-II set aside but 323/471 upheld + 324 added with Rs.3L compensation.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Conviction upheld.

[Open CW-2020-0009](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2020-0009)