A Division Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the certiorari writ petitions of Inspector and Sub-Inspector of M3 Puzhal Police Station, upholding the Tamil Nadu SHRC order dated 13 November 2018 in SHRC No. 9744 of 2013 and the consequential GO(D) No. 987 of 2022. The SHRC had found that the officers, after falsely implicating complainant [name withheld] in Crime No. 2046 of 2013, picked him up around 3 AM on 20 December 2013, kept him in the lock-up till 22 December, stripped and beat him, coerced gold jewellery worth lakhs, and assaulted him again near the Kathirvedu bridge while taking him to jail. The Court held the SHRC recommendation binding and enforceable under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, sustained the Rs 1 lakh compensation to the complainant with recovery from the two officers, and held police officials must respect human dignity and human-rights standing orders. 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 12 June 2025 in W.P. Nos. 4569/2023 & 17866/2024, the Madras High Court (Coram: J. Nisha Banu, M. Jothiraman, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Inspector, M3 Puzhal Police Station, Chennai; Sub-Inspector, M3 Puzhal Police Station, Chennai, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Judgment dated 12 June 2025. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
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 State Human Rights Commission after conducting enquiry comes to a conclusion that it is seen from the oral and documentary evidence of the parties, complainant/4th respondent/Mr.a Puzhal man was tortured and arrested by the police. Though there is no …” (para 12)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.
(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.
