2002 (4) TMI 999 - HC - Indian Laws

Court awards compensation for wrongful detention, harassment, and faulty investigation. Special investigation team formed.

N.M.T. Joy Immaculate Versus State and Ors.

N.M.T. Joy Immaculate Versus State and Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Illegal detention2. Molestation and harassment in police custody3. Faulty and mala fide investigation4. Grant of police custody5. Compensation for violation of fundamental rightsDetailed Analysis:1. Illegal Detention:The petitioner, a young college girl, was detained illegally by the police personnel of P4 Basin Bridge Police Station from 20.10.2001 to 24.10.2001. The court found that the petitioner was wrongfully and illegally detained for four days. The police did not follow the procedures outlined in Sections 160 and 51 of the Cr.P.C., nor did they respect the rights conferred under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner's parents sent telegrams to the Chief Justice of the High Court informing about her illegal custody, which were verified and found to be true.2. Molestation and Harassment in Police Custody:The petitioner was subjected to molestation, obscene violations, and teasing by the police personnel during her illegal detention. Despite complaints to the Woman Sub Inspector of Police, no action was taken, and instead, the petitioner was warned to keep quiet. The court expressed shock and sorrow over the inhuman behavior of the police personnel, highlighting the mental and physical trauma suffered by the petitioner.3. Faulty and Mala Fide Investigation:The investigation conducted by the P1 Pulianthope Police and P4 Basin Bridge Police was found to be faulty and mala fide. The court noted contradictions in the affidavits filed by the police officers and inconsistencies with the records. False documents were created to implicate the petitioner, and the investigation was not conducted in a bona fide manner. The court concluded that the police had not come to court with clean hands and had filed false affidavits.4. Grant of Police Custody:The Magistrate granted police custody of the petitioner without considering the reasons mentioned in the surrender petition and the objection petition for police custody. The court found that the order granting police custody was ex facie illegal and non-est. The Magistrate failed to apply judicial mind and ignored the telegrams sent to the Chief Justice regarding the illegal custody. The court held that the consequent confession and alleged recovery during the police custody had no evidentiary value.5. Compensation for Violation of Fundamental Rights:The court recognized the powers to grant compensation for the violation of fundamental rights. It was held that the State is responsible for the tortious acts committed by its employees. The court directed the Home Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the petitioner for her illegal detention and the acts of molestation and harassment committed by the police personnel.Conclusion:The court directed the Commissioner of Police to constitute a special team to continue the investigation under his direct supervision, excluding P1 and P4 police. Immediate departmental action was ordered against the responsible police personnel. The State Government was instructed to issue circulars to ensure that women accused/witnesses are not brought to police stations and are only interrogated by women police at their residences. The revision and the petition for transfer of investigation were disposed of with these observations.