(1) SPECIAL leave is gr0nted. (2) THE husband of the appellant died while he was in police custody. According to the police it was a case of suicide which the appellant dis- putes. She filed a writ petition before the High court praying for a direc- tion for investigation by the central Bureau of Investigation and claiming compensation. The writ petition was dismissed by a learned Single Judge and the petitioner filed an appeal which was heard and disposed of by a Division bench by the impugned judgment, by directing an independent inquiry to be made by the Union Territory of Pondicherry, respondent 1. No further relief was granted. (3) BY an affidavit sworn by the Superintendent of Police, Pondicherry and filed on behalf of the State, it is asserted that the deceased husband of the appellant had committed suicide by hanging and neither the State nor any of its officers can be held responsible. However, it appears that the doctor conducting the post-mortem exam- ination rejected the theory of death by hanging on the ground of absence of an injury mark on the neck of the deceased. The respondents have attempted to challenge the medical opinion and have relied on Modis book on Medical Jurisprudence. (4) BY an interim order on 27/03/1990 this court held that the matter demanded further investigation by the central Bureau of Investigation, government of India and a direction was issued to the Director, CBI, to take necessary steps so that the inquiry was expeditiously made by an officer of the rank of DIG. Accordingly an inquiry was made and a report was directly submitted by the Dy. SP/CBI/SCB/Madras, which is at pages 70-78 of the paper book. The position is further clarified by the letter dated 8/08/1991 addressed to the Registrar of this court and marked Confidential. We, however, do not see any reason to treat the said letter confidential, as it throws light on the relevant circumstances relating to the inquiry and must be disclosed to the parties, (5) WE have heard the learned counsel for the respondents and have considered the relevant documents and are of the view that the matter requires further examination by the court. Having regard to the post- mortem report, the investigation report submitted by the CBI, and the allegations of the appellant, the court should re-examine the entire case in greater detail, and may direct any further step considered suitable to be taken, with a view to find the cause of and responsibility for the death . of the appellants husband. The prayer for compensation also deserves to be reconsidered in the light of the ultimate conclusion which may be reached by the court. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the respondent State that in a similar case a sum of Rs. 25,000.00 was allowed by way of interim compensation. If the prayer for compensation is ultimate- ly allowed, this fact may be taken into account. (6) SINCE in our opinion it will be more proper for the High court to consider the case further, we set aside both the judgments passed by the learned Single Judge and the division bench and remit the writ petition for fresh disposal in the light of the observations above. (7) THE appellant is not represented today before us. The High Court, therefore, shall issue notice and, on her appearance, shall pass orders making legal assistance available to her at the cost of the State before taking up the hearing of the writ petition. The appeal is accor- dingly allowed. Let the copies of the investigation report submitted by the CBI and the letter referred to above be sent down to the High court.