PANAJI
High Court of Bombay at Goa in the last week awarded compensation of Rs 25,000 to one Rajendra Singh, an inmate serving life imprisonment at Central Jail Aguada, for the pain and suffering apart from the torture at the hands of jail authorities for no justifiable reason back in October 2012.
Justice F M Reis and Justice Nutan Sardessai partly allowed a criminal writ petition and directed the State to pay the compensation with the liberty to recover from the delinquent official after fixing the responsibility on him.
From the material on record, the HC observed that the petitioner was subjected to assault while in custody which is a clear reflection of violation of his right to life enshrined in the Constitution of India.
“He (the petitioner) is not only entitled to compensation for the injuries inflicted unduly on him but a message was also required to be sent to the officials that such acts on their part would visit them with punitive or disciplinary action for violation of the human rights of the prisoner for no justifiable reason,” reads the judgment.
Singh, the petitioner, availed free legal aid service to approach the judiciary.
In his petition, he had stated that he was subjected to physical and mental torture apart from harassment and assault with lathis by the prison authority on duty as per the directions of the former Superintendent of Central Jail, Aguada on October 30, 2012 between 1 pm and 1.30 pm.
An enquiry was ordered by the Court into the matter. The report submitted by the enquiry commissioner concluded that the petitioner had been assaulted by the jail authorities but that the identity of the assailants was not certain.
Statements of the jailor and jail guards, the petitioner, the doctor, the chief medical officer attached with Goa Medical College and Hospital, Bambolim and other medical practitioners were recorded.
The doctor who examined the petitioner on October 31, 2012 at 10.30 am offered a history of assault by the jail guards. He observed that there was no fracture anywhere on Singh’s body but that he had suffered multiple bruises which were soft tissue injuries and had been diagnosed as a case of assault. Doctors opined that the injuries could have been caused by lathis or sticks.
As a result, the enquiry report reflected that Singh was assaulted in the jail premises for no particular reason although a case was sought to be projected by the authorities that he was found in possession of prohibited article (a mobile phone).
HC also perused the report of the Additional Sessions Judge wherein she observed that the jail authorities had shown ignorance about the incident of the assault on the petitioner in the office of the superintendent.
Only one jailor had submitted that the petitioner had been escorted to the office of the superintendent on October 30, 2012 and thereafter enquiries were made by the jailor V Gawas from the petitioner and that in his presence, Gawas had ordered the jail guards to assault the petitioner.
The Additional Sessions Judge in her report concluded that higher jail authorities had tried to suppress the true facts of the incident and given a different colour as if the injuries suffered by the petitioner and another were in the course of a fight with each other.
Involvement of the jail authorities in assaulting the petitioner could not at all ruled out, it was stated.
Both, the Additional Sessions Judge and the enquiry officer agreed that Singh was assaulted while in custody. However, because the responsibility couldn’t be pinned on any official, the State was asked to pay the compensation while allowing it to recover the same from the delinquent official.
