Jharkhand High Court Orders Probe and ₹1.5 Lakh Compensation in Alleged Custodial Thrashing of JLKM Leader

Introduction

In a significant reaffirmation of constitutional safeguards against custodial violence, the Jharkhand High Court has ordered a comprehensive probe and directed the immediate payment of ₹1.5 lakh as compensation to Jharkhand Loktantrik Krantikari Morcha (JLKM) leader Tarun Kumar Mahato, who was allegedly subjected to custodial thrashing by the police. The Court emphasised individual accountability of erring police officials, reinforcing the principle that custodial torture is a grave violation of fundamental rights.


Background of the Case

Arrest and Alleged Custodial Torture

  • Date of Arrest: Night of November 28

  • Police Station: Ichagarh Police Station, Seraikela-Kharsawan district

  • Allegation: Severe physical assault while in police custody

  • Reason for Arrest: Dispute related to alleged illegal mining and transportation of sand

Following his arrest, Tarun Kumar Mahato reportedly sustained serious injuries and has since been undergoing treatment at Seraikela Sadar Hospital.


Complaint Triggering High Court Intervention

Letter to Constitutional Authorities

The High Court took suo motu cognisance of a complaint letter dated December 5, sent by:

  • Bhanumati Mahato, wife of the victim

Addressed to:

  • President of India Droupadi Murmu

  • Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant

  • Chief Justice of Jharkhand High Court

The complaint detailed allegations of custodial torture, prompting immediate judicial scrutiny.


High Court Proceedings and Directions

Bench Composition

The matter was heard by a Division Bench comprising:

  • Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan

  • Justice Rajesh Shankar


Key Orders Passed by the Court

The High Court issued the following directions:

  • Immediate compensation of ₹1.5 lakh to Tarun Kumar Mahato

  • Amount to be recovered from erring police officials

  • State DGP directed to file a detailed reply within four weeks

  • Medical examination of Mahato ordered through the Director of State Health Services

  • Medical report to be submitted at the next hearing on January 7

  • Physical appearance of the DGP and SP directed before the Court

  • A comprehensive investigation ordered into custodial thrashing allegations

The Court stressed that custodial violence cannot be shielded by institutional silence and must result in personal liability.


Investigation Initiated Pursuant to Court Order

Police Probe Status

  • Investigating Officer: Kolhan DIG Anuranjan Kisphotta

  • Statements of police personnel involved have been recorded

  • Statement of Bhanumati Mahato could not be recorded due to her absence

  • State DGP Tadasha Mishra and SP Mukesh Lunayat have already appeared before the High Court


Political and Public Reaction

Statement by JLKM Leadership

JLKM Chief and Dumri MLA Jairam Mahato, accompanied by senior leader Devendra Mahato, alleged:

  • Police denied them entry into Seraikela Sadar Hospital

  • Permission was refused citing Mahato’s judicial custody

  • Raised suspicion regarding:

    • Circumstances of arrest

    • Alleged police involvement in illegal mining and sand transportation

He expressed confidence in the judiciary and demanded strict action against guilty officials.


Constitutional Provisions Involved

Article 21 – Right to Life and Personal Liberty

  • Custodial torture constitutes a direct violation of Article 21

  • The Supreme Court has consistently held that:

    • The right to life includes dignity, bodily integrity, and freedom from torture


Article 22 – Protection Against Arbitrary Arrest and Detention

  • Mandates safeguards during arrest and detention

  • Any physical abuse in custody violates procedural and substantive due process


Article 14 – Equality Before Law

  • Police officials are not above the law

  • Selective violence or abuse of power violates equal protection guarantees


Statutory Provisions Applicable

Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Potential offences include:

  • Section 323 – Voluntarily causing hurt

  • Section 330 – Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession

  • Section 331 – Grievous hurt to extort confession

  • Section 342 – Wrongful confinement

  • Section 166 – Public servant disobeying law with intent to cause injury


Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)

  • Section 41 & 41A – Safeguards during arrest

  • Section 54 – Medical examination of arrested persons

  • Section 176(1A) – Mandatory judicial inquiry in custodial violence cases


Judicial Precedents on Custodial Violence

D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997)

  • Laid down mandatory arrest and detention guidelines

  • Recognised custodial torture as a civil and constitutional wrong

  • Allowed compensation as a public law remedy


Nilabati Behera v. State of Odisha (1993)

  • Held that compensation can be awarded for custodial violence

  • Such compensation does not bar criminal prosecution of offenders


Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar (1983)

  • Established the principle of monetary compensation for illegal detention

  • Recognised public law damages under Article 21


Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006)

  • Emphasised police accountability and institutional reforms

  • Reinforced responsibility of senior police leadership


Significance of the High Court’s Order

Why This Ruling Matters

  • Reinforces zero tolerance for custodial torture

  • Establishes personal liability of police officials

  • Strengthens the role of constitutional courts as protectors of civil liberties

  • Sends a strong deterrent message to law enforcement agencies


Conclusion

The Jharkhand High Court’s intervention underscores that custodial violence strikes at the heart of constitutional governance. By ordering compensation, a medical probe, and fixing personal accountability, the Court has reaffirmed that the rule of law does not end at the doors of police custody.

The outcome of the ongoing investigation will be closely watched, as it carries broader implications for police accountability, human rights enforcement, and constitutional discipline in India.

Comments

Popular posts

Father of RG Kar Victim Loses Faith in Legal System Amid Allegations of CBI Inconsistencies

Bill Gates Applauds India's 'Namo Drone Didi' Program: A Game-Changer in Rural Empowerment and Agri-Tech

Encroachment on Public Land: A Growing Threat to Governance and Public Welfare

Flight Operations Disrupted Amid India-Pakistan Tensions: Air India and IndiGo Cancel Multiple Flights on May 13, 2025

Your Complete Online Guide to Land Records and Services in Bihar

Equality Before Law

Rights of a Arrested Person in India

Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Supreme Court Allows Collection of Voice Samples from Witnesses — Not Just Accused Persons