CW-2023-0036Dindigul, Tamil NaduJudgment 23 February 2023

Dindigul Resident and Others v. Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District

Three serving Dindigul policemen faced a custodial-death complaint; the NHRC enquired, ordered compensation to the victim's family, and directed the Government to pay and recover from the policemen, yielding recovery orders dated 06.11.2015 and 10.12.2015. The policemen challenged the recovery before the Madurai Bench, which had earlier stayed recovery subject to the outcome of the criminal proceedings. The Government reported that all three were convicted in the criminal case on 27.04.2021. On 23.02.2023 the Court therefore declined to entertain the petition and dismissed it, keeping the compensation recovery alive with liberty to revive their rights if acquitted on appeal.

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 23 February 2023 in W.P.(MD) No.7380 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) No.6201 of 2016, the Madras High Court (Coram: S. Srimathy, J.) returned findings adverse to 3 police personnel, namely: Police personnel, Dindigul District Police; Police personnel, Dindigul District Police; Police personnel, Dindigul District Police.

Register number
TN 57 CW 0020
Case reference
W.P.(MD) No.7380 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) No.6201 of 2016
Court and date
Madras High Court (Coram: S. Srimathy, J.), 23 February 2023
Officer(s) at the material time
Police personnel, Dindigul District Police; Police personnel, Dindigul District Police; Police personnel, Dindigul District Police
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Finding of the Court (extract)
“Since the criminal proceedings ended in conviction, this Writ Petition stands dismissed.” (at para 6)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation.
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 Madras High Court judgment dated 23 February 2023 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.

“Since the criminal proceedings ended in conviction, this Writ Petition stands dismissed.” (para 6)

Institutional response

1
23 Feb 2023

Order issued

Concluded
Madras High Court External · Binding

The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered compensation in an amount stated in the judgment.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: W.P.(MD) No.7380 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD) No.6201 of 2016
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

2
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))

25 Sep 2026

(Compensation ordered by the NHRC (recoverable from the three policemen) with no fixed amount in the order; the High Court kept the recovery in force.)

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.