JUDGMENT - Dr. E.S. Da Silva, J. :—-A letter dated 1st February, 1993, from one Smt. Chandravati Jambuvant Tari from Divar seeking for a probe into the alleged murder of her son Mahendra Tari in police custody at Ponda Police lock-up addressed to Kamat, J., was directed to be treated as a writ petition. When the matter was placed before this Division Bench after its registration upon hearing the applicant rule was made and by order dated 2nd March, 1993, the respondents were directed to produce in Court all the investigation papers of the case in which the deceased son of the applicant was arrested and they were also instructed to produce inquiry papers of the custodial death. By a subsequent order dated 7th April, 1993, the applicant was granted legal aid and Mr. M. Sonak was appointed to render the required assistance. Accordingly a fresh petition was prepared and filed by Mr. Soank in a proper form which was presented in the Court and taken on record on 7th July, 1993. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that her son Mahendra Tari aged 24 years was employed as an Accountant in Goa Telematics Ltd., having office at Kundaim Industrial Estate, Ponda. However, it was alleged that during the period between 1st December, 1992 and 28th December, 1992, the said Mahendra was involved in commission of offences punishable under sections 380, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge was that Mahendra had pilfered certain blank cheques belonging to his employer and by committing forgery had withdrawn an amount of Rs. 25,000/-. The statements which are recorded after the death of Mahendra in police custody show that certain officers of Goa Telematics, including Shri N.H. Subhnani, had questioned Mahendra about these figures on 28th December, 1992. Mahendra denied his guilt and had even offered co-operation for carrying out the investigation. He had been in the office until 7 p.m. on 28th December, 1992. On 29th December, 1992 Mahendra reported to the office at the usual time. He was in the office until 2 p.m. Mahendra left the office at 2 p.m. after seeking permission from his superiors. On 29th December, 1992 three persons including one Shri Mahadevan contacted the petitioner's eldest son Rajendra Tari at Panaji. The said three persons were employees of Goa Telematics where Mahendra was serving as Accountant. He was in the office until 2 p.m. Mahendra left the office at 2 p.m. after seeking permission from his superiors. On 29th December, 1992 three persons including one Shri Mahadevan contacted the petitioner's eldest son Rajendra Tari at Panaji. The said three persons were employees of Goa Telematics where Mahendra was serving as Accountant. The said three persons informed Rajendra that a fraud/misappropriation had been discovered at the office, wherein some persons had stolen six blank cheques from the office of M/s. Goa Telematics, forged signatures thereon and encashed an amount of Rs. 1.25 lakhs. The said persons further informed Rajendra that Dr. Subhnani, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, was suspecting involvement of some persons including the deceased Mahendra. The aforesaid persons also informed Rajendra that Subhnani had viewed the matter very seriously and that the consequences of Mahendra not confessing true facts would be extremely serious. They therefore, asked Rajendra to convince Mahendra to disclose the true facts to Subhnani by 7.30 p.m. on the same day failing which Subhnani had threatened to go to the police. It was further the case of the petitioner that Rajendra although became disturbed however assured the aforesaid persons that he would speak to Mahendra and upon being acquainted with his version would advise him accordingly. Rajendra also assured them that he would himself bring his brother Mahendra to the office on the next day in order to sort out the matters. The petitioner stated that soon after Mahendra came home at about 6.30 to 7.30 p.m. Rajendra then spoke of him in front of the other family members about what was narrated to him by the aforesaid persons from the office. However, Mahendra assured the petitioner and the other persons that he was completely innocent and in no way involved with the alleged misappropriation of funds. However, he agreed that Rajendra should go to his office at Kundaim for sorting out the matters. It was further averred in the petition that from the statements and other documents furnished by the respondents it appears that Dr. Subhnani contacted the Superintendent of Police, North Division, in order to lodge a complaint against Mahendra on the evening of 29th December, 1992. In the office of the Superintendent of Police, North Division, Dr. It was further averred in the petition that from the statements and other documents furnished by the respondents it appears that Dr. Subhnani contacted the Superintendent of Police, North Division, in order to lodge a complaint against Mahendra on the evening of 29th December, 1992. In the office of the Superintendent of Police, North Division, Dr. Subhnani and others appear to have been informed that P.I. Allan D'Sa was on his way from Ponda to the Police Headquarters at Panaji in connection with some other matter. As such the Superintendent of Police assured Dr. Subhnani that the case would be handed over to P.I. Allan D'sa upon his arrival. Soon after P.I. Allan D'sa reached the office of the Superintendent of Police, North Division, at about 8.45 p.m., there were deliberations and discussions between the persons present and decision was taken to immediately raid the house of the petitioner. The petitioner states that it is now sought with to be made out that two employees of M/s. Goa Telematics were sent over to Ponda Police Station with the complaint of Dr. Subhnani for the purpose of registration of the same. The records have also been manipulated to show that the complaint was in fact recorded at about 10.15 p.m. on 29th December, 1992. However, the raid on the petitioner's house and the arrest of Mahendra were effected between 9.30 and 10.30 p.m., i.e., prior to the registration of the complaint. The arrest was effected by P.I. Allan D'sa and accompanying him was the A.S.I. Hari Redkar. Dr. Subhnani was also present at the time of the arrest. The police officers did not search the house of the petitioner but they created a violent atmosphere in order to scare Mahendra and the rest of the family members. The petitioner's pleadings that Mahendra would be brought to the Police Station on the next day by his brother Rajendra were not acceded. Dr. Subhnani insisted that the arrest should be affected there and then and P.I. Allan D'Sa obliged him. The petitioner's house is situated at Divar and from there Mahendra is alleged to have been taken to Ribandar Police Station where he was questioned by P.I. Allan D'Sa in the presence of Dr. Subhnani. Dr. Subhnani insisted that the arrest should be affected there and then and P.I. Allan D'Sa obliged him. The petitioner's house is situated at Divar and from there Mahendra is alleged to have been taken to Ribandar Police Station where he was questioned by P.I. Allan D'Sa in the presence of Dr. Subhnani. The petitioner has serious apprehensions that during the questioning P.I. Allan D'Sa as assaulted and threatened Mahendra with dire consequences in the event he failed to hand over Rs. 25,000/- allegedly withdrawn by him. According to the statements Mahendra was moved to the Police Station at about 1.30 p.m. It is very much likely that P.I. Allan D'sa has tortured, assaulted and terrorised Mahendra prior to handing him over at the Ponda Police Station. The case of the respondent is that Mahendra was put in the police lock-up at 1.40 a.m. on 30th December, 1992 and at about 3.40 a.m. he is alleged to have committed suicide. It appears that the Police Sentry Guard entered the police cell moments after the alleged suicide but no efforts were made to verify as to whether Mahendra was really dead. The Magistrate was informed about the Suicide at 4.45 a.m. on 30th December, 1992 but he arrived at the police station only at 9.30 a.m. The inquest panchanama was conducted at about 10.30 a.m. in the absence of any of the members of the petitioner's family. It was further stated that on 30th December, 1992, at 6 p.m., Rajendra was leaving for Ponda in order to greet Mahendra who was due to celebrate his birthday on that day. In the ferry boat, at about 6.30 a.m., Rajendra was accosted by the police constable who required him to come to Ribandar Police Station. At Ribandar Police Station Rajendra was made to sit upto 8.30 a.m. after being told that P.I. Allan D'Sa would be coming along with Mahendra shortly. At about 8.30 a.m. Rajendra was put in a police jeep and taken to Ponda Police Station. At about 9.30 a.m. the Magistrate told Rajendra that he would have to give a statement in the event he desired the release of his brother. It was stated that the Magistrate dictated to Rajendra a statement wherein the story was concocted to the effect that Mahendra was in a suicidal mood on the previous day and he had taken some sleeping tablets. It was stated that the Magistrate dictated to Rajendra a statement wherein the story was concocted to the effect that Mahendra was in a suicidal mood on the previous day and he had taken some sleeping tablets. After signing the statement the Magistrate informed Rajendra that Mahendra had committed suicide in the police custody and that he should come along with him to see the dead body. Rajendra refused to see the dead body but was pushed in the cell and forced to see the hanging body of his brother. At this Rajendra broke down and requested the police to make a call to his sister. The petitioner states that subsequently the whole attempt of the respondents is to see that the death of Mahendra is proved as suicidal and therefore they are trying hard to make out a case that Mahendra was contemplating suicide right from 28th December, 1992. The petitioner has stated that she refused to accept that Mahendra would have thought of committing suicide and also that he might have defrauded M/s. Goa Telematics withdrawing money from its bank accounts by committing forgery of cheques. It was also stated that the Magistrate's inquiry discloses non-application of mind being also biased and cursory. The Magistrate has not addressed himself intentionally to relevant questions which were material for the requirement. The entries in the registers maintained by the respondents appear also to have been manipulated being therefore, suspicious. The petitioner stated that from the circumstances of the case it is evident that Mahendra was murdered by the Police Officers at the instance of Dr. Subhnani and Shri Sadashiv Pandit of Goa Telematics. The Police Officers have tortured and used third degree methods on Mahendra compelling him to commit suicide. Besides the failure to call a doctor after his alleged hanging is also highly suspicious. The Magistrate acted in a biased manner and the entire matter has been attempted to be hushed up. She therefore prayed that a C.B.I. inquiry be ordered into the incident of 29th/30th December, 1993, the petitioner be suitably compensated for the loss of life of her son and a prosecution be ordered against the guilty officials. 3. On behalf of the respondents, affidavits were filed by Dy. She therefore prayed that a C.B.I. inquiry be ordered into the incident of 29th/30th December, 1993, the petitioner be suitably compensated for the loss of life of her son and a prosecution be ordered against the guilty officials. 3. On behalf of the respondents, affidavits were filed by Dy. S.P. Joe D'Souza Sub-Divisional Police Officer at Panaji, Shri Allan D'Sa, Police Inspector attached to the Ponda Police Station, Shri N.C. Raikar, Police Sub-Inspector also attached to the Ponda Police Station and Shri Hari Redkar, Driver in the Ponda Police Station. The sum and substance of these affidavits is that the allegation that Mahendra was mercilessly beaten to death or assaulted or murdered as alleged by the petitioner is totally false. It was also denied that the Deputy Collector had forced the petitioner's son to sign any statement under threats or coercion. It was contended that Mahendra's death in the lock-up was a result of suicide by hanging committed by him in the toilet block of the Ponda Police Station lock-up. Mahendra has been arrested and lodged in the police lock-up at about 1.40 a.m. on 30th December, 1992 as a result of the criminal offence registered against him. It was stated in this regard that on 29th December, 1992 one Dr. N.H. Subhnani, Chief Executive and power-of-attorney holder of M/s. Goa Telematics Ltd., approached the Superintendent, of Police, North, in his office at Police Headquarters, Panaji and gave a type of complaint addressed to the officer-in-charge of the Ponda Police Station with a copy to him. In the complaint it was alleged that Mahendra was their employee working with them as trainee in Accounts Section of that Company at Kundaim. It was mentioned that the Company had accounts in Canara Bank, Bank Of Baroda, State Bank of India at Panaji and some other Banks of Ponda, Bombay and New Delhi. It was further alleged in the said complaint that theft, fraud, defalcation, forgery and falsification of accounts had been detected with reference to their two accounts in Canara Bank and State Bank of India, Panaji, totalling to an amount of Rs. 1.25 lakhs and that Mahendra was suspected of having cheated the company to the tune of the above said amount. It was also disclosed that an amount of Rs. 25,000 was fraudulently withdrawn by Mahendra on 28th December, 1992 from the Canara Bank, Panaji. 1.25 lakhs and that Mahendra was suspected of having cheated the company to the tune of the above said amount. It was also disclosed that an amount of Rs. 25,000 was fraudulently withdrawn by Mahendra on 28th December, 1992 from the Canara Bank, Panaji. The complainant requested the police to investigate the matter. When the Ponda Police Station was contacted on telephone they reported that Police Inspector Allan D'Sa in charge of the Police Station was on his way to Panaji to see the Superintendent of Police, North, in connection with some other duties. The said Inspector came to the office of the Superintendent of Police at about 8.30 p.m. He was informed by the Superintendent of Police about the complaint and asked to take up the case and check about the involvement of Mahendra. The Police Inspector forwarded the complaint to the Ponda Police Station through one Shri R. Sawardekar, an employee of Goa Telematics, who had accompanied Dr. Subhnani, directing Police Sub-Inspector Shri N.C. Raikar of Ponda Police Station to register the complaint and take up investigation of the same. Where upon taking the assistance of the staff of the Ribandar Police Station, Shri Allan D'Sa proceeded to Divar to secure the presence of the accused Mahendra. The complaint was registered as Crime No. 314/92 under sections 380, 468 and 420 of the I.P.C. in the Station Diary under entry No. 68/92 dated 29th December, 1992 of Ponda Police Station at about 10.15 p.m. by Shri Raikar, who was entrusted to investigate the case. In the meantime, at about 9.55 p.m. on 29th December, 1992, Police Inspector Allan D'Sa proceeded to the residence of the accused Mahendra in Divar to secure his presence. The said Police Inspector found Mahendra at his residence and he was brought to Ribandar Police Station at about 11 p.m., where he was kept there for sometime to be taken thereafter to the Inquiry Officer Raikar at Ponda Police Station. P.I. Allan D'Sa instructed Shri Hari Redkar to take Mahendra and hand him over to the Inquiry Officer Raikar for further investigation. In the meantime, Police Inspector Allan D'Sa returned to his residence at Betim, Goa. P.S.I. Redkar drove him in the jeep at about 11.30 p.m. and also drove Dr. Subhnani to his residence at Caranzalen after which he returned back to Ribandar Police Station at about 12.30 p.m. on 29th December, 1992. In the meantime, Police Inspector Allan D'Sa returned to his residence at Betim, Goa. P.S.I. Redkar drove him in the jeep at about 11.30 p.m. and also drove Dr. Subhnani to his residence at Caranzalen after which he returned back to Ribandar Police Station at about 12.30 p.m. on 29th December, 1992. Shri Allan D'Sa did not come to the Ponda Police Station on that night of 29th December, 1992. He was at his residence at Betim where on the next morning, at about 4.15 p.m. he was informed about the death of Mahendra in the lock-up at Ponda Police Station. The said Hari Redkar took Mahendra from Ribandar Police Station in the jeep escorted by Police Constable No. 1777 of Ribandar Police Station and handed him over to Shri Raikar at Ponda Police Station at about 1.30 a.m. On 30th December, 1992. As it was too late in the night of 29th December, 1992 and too early in the morning of 30th December, 1992, being odd hours, no further investigation of the accused could be done at that time. Shri Raikar then proceeded to his quarters situated in the same building of the Police Station. In the early morning of 30th December, 1992, at about 4 a.m., Police Constable No. 592 of Ponda Police Station Shri Naru Sawant informed Sub-Inspector Raikar that Mahendra was found hanging in the toilet block of the lock-up. Raikar immediately came to the Police Station lock-up and after seeing the dead body of Mahendra hanging in the lock-up toilet block informed P.I. Allan D'Sa about the incident on telephone at his residence at Betim. P.I. Allan D'Sa then informed Dy. S.P. Joe D'Souza immediately at his residence. Shri Raikar also inform the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ponda and requested him to come immediately to the Police Station. The Superintendent of Police, North and also the District Magistrate were also informed. Thereafter Dy. S.P. Joe D'Souza with P.I. Allan D'Sa came to Ponda Police Station. He verified that Mahendra committed suicide by hanging with the help of his shirt in the toiler block of the lock up. By that time the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Shri Govind Dessai had also arrived at the Police Station. He conducted the inquest panchanama in the lock-up and also called a photographer to take photos of the dead body. He verified that Mahendra committed suicide by hanging with the help of his shirt in the toiler block of the lock up. By that time the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Shri Govind Dessai had also arrived at the Police Station. He conducted the inquest panchanama in the lock-up and also called a photographer to take photos of the dead body. The body of Mahendra was then sent to the Goa Medical College at Bambolim for post-mortem. Shri Dessai also conducted a magisterial inquiry and subsequently sent his report to the District Magistrate. It was stated that the death of Mahendra was as a result of suicide committed by him by hanging himself to the toilet block of Ponda Police Station. The said toilet block consists of two small compartments namely the W.C. and the washing room separated by a wall with a door to it. Any person using the toilet block cannot be seen by the sentry or any other police from outside the main iron gate of the lock-up. Mahendra hanged himself with the help of his long-sleeved shirt. It appears that he made a knot of the sleeves of his shirt to hang himself. In the lock-up including the toilet block there are metallic electrical pipe fittings. Mahendra tied the sleeves of his shirt to the said metallic pipe by inserting it in the said metallic pipe in the wash room of the block. At that particular place there is also a portion of metallic pipe projecting downwards just below the bulb holder. Mahendra inserted the sleeves and thereafter inserted his neck in the ring or knot made out of the said shirt. It seems that Mahendra took the help of hole through which a piece of pipe is protruding to climb up and in the process of hanging he might have got dashed his head against the protruding metallic pipe and the wall as a result of which he received some abrasions on his forehead and face. It was further stated that Mahendra was suspected to be involved in the cheating, theft, fraud, defalcation, forgery, falsification of accounts case lodged against him by Dr. Subhnani. 4. It was further stated that Mahendra was suspected to be involved in the cheating, theft, fraud, defalcation, forgery, falsification of accounts case lodged against him by Dr. Subhnani. 4. By Order dated 7th July, 1993, this Bench, after considering the averments made in the application of the petitioner, felt that the matter should be inquired into by the Central Bureau of Investigation and therefore the C.B.I. was directed to inquire into the case and submit its Report. Accordingly, the Report of the C.B.I. dated 10th December, 1993, was filed and placed on record. The findings of the said report show that there is no evidence regarding homicidal hanging or abetment in the hanging of Mahendra against the respondents. However, the inquiry found that Mahendra was an emotional type of man and used to take small things to heart. He did not return to office when he came to know that the complaint was being filed by the police and he was afraid of the same. He was looking disturbed after the incident. When he was put in the lock-up he was taken aback. While forging the documents and withdrawing the money Mahendra never expected that the crime would be noticed or detected. When the police took him up for interrogation and thereafter arrested and put him in the lock-up he felt it difficult to face his friends and acquaintances which he could not bear and decided to end his life. The only way to end his life in the lock-up was to hang himself and his clothes which he was wearing were handy to him. Accordingly he planned and committed suicide. The further findings of the Inquiry Officer are that when Mahendra was taken by the police from his residence his brother Rajendra told the Police Inspector that he had consumed sleeping tablets and he was given some salt water for vomiting. This shows that Mahendra was so perturbed that he wanted to commit suicide even before the arrest. Therefore the Inquiry Officer was of the view that under these circumstances Police Inspector Allan D'Sa should have taken utmost care while bringing the deceased to the Police Station and getting him arrested. Instead P.I. Allan D'Sa has acted casually and handed over the deceased to the driver of the jeep and took him to Ponda Police Station. Therefore the Inquiry Officer was of the view that under these circumstances Police Inspector Allan D'Sa should have taken utmost care while bringing the deceased to the Police Station and getting him arrested. Instead P.I. Allan D'Sa has acted casually and handed over the deceased to the driver of the jeep and took him to Ponda Police Station. P.S.I. Raikar also acted casually although in a different manner to the extent that he has not taken the note sent by Police Inspector Allan D'Sa seriously in which he had learnt that the accused should be interrogated properly and his detailed statement be recorded. P.I. Allan D'Sa had revealed that he had already conveyed to the driver that Mahendra had taken some sleeping tablets. It was also found that both Police Inspector and Police Sub-Inspector who arrested him and took him under custody failed to examine Mahendra medically before putting him in the lock-up although he had allegedly consumed sleeping tablets. That by itself would make them to suspect that Mahendra was likely to try to end his life and therefore the local police should have taken utmost care while putting him in the lock-up. In the circumstances he should have also been under continuous watch. Thus, according to the Report, the local police miserably failed and gave room for suspicion regarding the death of Mahendra. The Report concluded that the lapse on the part of the police and the most improper manner Mahendra was handled created doubts in the minds of the family members of the deceased as well as the public regarding the cause of death. It was further noted that after the hanging one Police Constable Jaidev Gauns had gone inside the wash room and seen the deceased hanging. However, no efforts were made by him to save his life. When P.S.I. Raikar found the deceased hanging he also concluded that Mahendra was dead. No doctor was called to find out whether he was dead or alive. The Inquiry Officer thus opined that had they taken necessary precautions the suicide would have been averted. In short, the conclusion of the Inquiry Officer was that this was a case of suicidal; hanging but P.I. Allan D'Sa then in charge of Ponda Police Station, P.S.I. Raikar and P.C. Jaidev Gauns were to be found negligent in performing their duties in the case of Mahendra. 5. Mr. In short, the conclusion of the Inquiry Officer was that this was a case of suicidal; hanging but P.I. Allan D'Sa then in charge of Ponda Police Station, P.S.I. Raikar and P.C. Jaidev Gauns were to be found negligent in performing their duties in the case of Mahendra. 5. Mr. Sonak, learned Counsel for the petitioner, while advancing his submission has disputed, at the very outset, the legality and the propriety of the deceased Mahendra's arrest at 10.30 p.m. on the fateful day of 29th December, 1993. It was contended that for that matter there was no justification to effect Mahendra's arrest immediately after the complaint regarding embezzlement of funds of M/s. Goa Telematics and forgery in its Bank accounts was lodged by his employer against the deceased so much so the record shows that not even a search of his house was conducted before his arrest and Mahendra was not also interrogated immediately thereafter. If the purpose of the arrest was to secure the recovery of the money allegedly withdrawn by him on that very day and this seems to be the purported aim of the prompt and over-enthusiastic action taken by the police on the complaint, apparently under instructions and on account of the personal interest taken in the case by the Superintendent of Police (North), the learned Counsel submitted, this appears to have been a pressure tactic on the part of the police officers to make Mahendra to confess the alleged crime which he had never committed and therefore, no arrest without a reasonable investigation was required to be done in such circumstances. Reliance was placed in this regard on the case of (Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. others)1, 1994(4) S.C.C. 260 , wherein the Supreme Court, on the matter of Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution and while dealing with the exercise of power by the police to arrest a person, has held that on arrest should not be merely on suspicion about complicity in the crime. The Court further observed that a Police Officer must be satisfied about the necessity and justification of such arrest on the basis of some investigation. Reasons for arrest must be recorded in his Diary and the arrest should normally be avoided except in cases of heinous crimes. The Court further observed that a Police Officer must be satisfied about the necessity and justification of such arrest on the basis of some investigation. Reasons for arrest must be recorded in his Diary and the arrest should normally be avoided except in cases of heinous crimes. The learned Counsel contended that after Mahendra's arrest there was gross negligence on the part of the police in providing proper care to the accused inspite of their being aware that Mahendra has consumed an overdoes of sleeping tablets which would by itself suggest not only his depressive mood but also a tendency on his part to commit suicide. It was urged in this regard that from the statement of P.I. Allan D'Sa it is seen that when he accompanied the police party to the deceased's residence to get him arrested he was told by his brother Rejendra that Mahendra was sleeping after a consumption of tablets for which he had made him to drink salt water and as a result of which he had vomited. In his statement the Police Officer also reveals that after Mahendra's arrest when he took him to Ribandar Police Station from where the deceased was sent to Ponda he orally informed the driver of the jeep A.S.I. Redkar with regard to his having taken sleeping tablets. Thus, according to the learned Counsel, being fully in the knowledge of this fact, it was the duty of the police officer to be more careful and not to place Mahendra under police custody in a solitary cell of the lock-up without submitting him first to medical examination in view of the suicidal attempt recealed earlier while taking an overdose of sleeping tablets. Further it was also expected from the Police Officers that they would keep a strict watch on his movements in the cell so as to foil every chance for him to play any mischief while being alone in the lock-up. The learned Counsel made also a strong plea with regard to the utter negligence and carelessness displayed by the police after the purported discovery of the hanging of Mahendra in the police lock-up cell. It was contended that the police failed to render to him immediate medical assistance which might have helped save his life. The learned Counsel made also a strong plea with regard to the utter negligence and carelessness displayed by the police after the purported discovery of the hanging of Mahendra in the police lock-up cell. It was contended that the police failed to render to him immediate medical assistance which might have helped save his life. The learned Counsel urged that the statement of P.I. Jaidev Sawant shows that he had spoken to the deceased just about two minutes before he was found hanging. Inspite of that the police constable did not bother to take any steps to verify whether he was really dead after he found him hanging in the toilet of the lock-up. No doctor was at all called at the police station to examine the deceased and give him adequate treatment. 6. Mr. Bhobe, learned Public Prosecutor, has sought to contradict the petitioner's learned Counsel's plea of criminal negligence by the Police Officers and his whole attempt was aimed at showing that there was no mala fide or ill intention on their part to create any situation which might have been reasonably contemplated by them as being conducive, in normal circumstances, to lead Mahendra to end his life. It was submitted that the investigation reveals that Mahendra, apart from being suspected of defalcation of the funds of M/s. Goa Telematics, had caused withdrawal of huge amounts from its Bank accounts for the last about one month prior to his arrest, by committing forgery of the signatures of the authorised signatories in the cheques of the company and has thus purportedly drawn an amount of Rs. 25,000/- from the Canara Bank on that very day which amount was supposed to be recovered by the Police although in fact no search was conducted at his residence at the time of his arrest. According to Mr. Bhobe there might be, at the most, an error of judgment or miscalculation in the whole exercise conducted in this case but by no means it could be said that there was any cause to blame the Police Officers on account of the action taken and hold them responsible for the hanging of Mahendra in the Police lock-up. 7. We have heard learned Counsel, perused the investigating papers and considered also the findings of the report submitted in this case by the C.B.I. as per the directions of this Court. 8. 7. We have heard learned Counsel, perused the investigating papers and considered also the findings of the report submitted in this case by the C.B.I. as per the directions of this Court. 8. Admittedly the letter/complaint addressed by the petitioner speaks of the harassment and cold blooded murder of her son at the hands of the Police, ruling out any case of suicide which he might have committed in the lock up cell, on the allegation that he was mercilessly beaten to death while in police custody. However the result of the investigation done by the C.B.I. totally negativates any case of harassment or physical violence on Mahendra prior or even after his arrest. Instead the report reveals that it was a case of suicide pure and simply as a consequence of the depressive mood occasioned under severe pressure consequent upon serious charges of defalcation of funds in which he found himself involved. The finding of the Inquiry Officer appears to be positive while pointing out that there was no evidence regarding any homicidal hanging or abetment thereof. It particularly refers to the fact that when the police party went to his residence to place him under its custody he was already a disturbed man who wanted to commit suicide even before the arrest. The report further speaks of Mahendra being an emotional person who used to take small things to heart. On the fateful day he did not return to the office when he came to know that a complaint was being filed with the police and he was afraid of the same. He was also looking perturbed after the incident. When put in the lock-up he was taken aback. While forging the documents and withdrawing the money he never expected that the crime would be detected. When the police took Mahendra for interrogation and thereafter got him arrested he realised how difficult it would be for him to face his friends and acquaintances. This he could not bear and that is why he decided to end his life. The only thing left was to hang himself in the lock-up and the clothes which he was wearing were handy to him. Accordingly he planned and committed suicide. 9. This he could not bear and that is why he decided to end his life. The only thing left was to hang himself in the lock-up and the clothes which he was wearing were handy to him. Accordingly he planned and committed suicide. 9. It is thus clear that for want of absolute evidence of physical harassments of the deceased Mahendra or even bodily violence caused to him by the police, which could amount to a breach of any constitutional guarantee, the question of violation of his human rights does not appear, prima facie, to arise at all. Therefore, it is impermissible to hold, in the context of the facts available on record, any of the police officials targeted in the petition guilty of non-compliance of their legal duties or in any manner responsible for the untimely death of Mahendra. 9A. We are very much conscious of our moral and legal obligations towards the society at large to secure and afford for every one adequate protection to the constitutional and human rights of all citizens against the arbitrary actions of the Executive through its Enforcement Agencies. We cannot however overlook that although the horizon of human rights is indeed fast expanding at the same time the crime rate seems also to be increasing day-by-day. We have therefore, to necessarily bear in mind this very aspect of the matter. In the discharge of its statutory duty the courts are supposed and required to strike a proper balance between the "rights, liberties and privileges of the single individual and those of individuals collectively". In other words the question particularly placed before us at this juncture is "of simply deciding what is wanted and where to put the weight and emphasis; of deciding which comes first the criminal or society, the law violator or the law abider" (Joginder Kumar's case supra cited). In this regard we respectfully advert to the observations of the Judge Learned Hand relied above that the protection of the individual from oppression and abuse by the police and other enforcing officers is indeed a major interest in a free society; but so also is the effective prosecution of crime, an interest which at times seems to be forgotten. 10. 10. Indeed the Inquiry Officer points out to certain faults by P.I. Allan D'Sa and other officers of Ponda Police Station which, according to him, could be aptly called as a sheer mishandling of the entire case since the time of Mahendra's arrest till after he was found hanging inside the washroom of the police lock-up. It was stated that under the circumstances P.I. Allan D'Sa should have taken utmost care in bringing Mahendra to the police station and getting him arrested. Instead it seems that he acted casually and handed over the deceased to the driver to take him to Ponda Police Station. P.S.I. Redkar has also acted casually and in a different manner inasmuch as he had not taken the note sent by P.I. Allan D'Sa seriously in which he had mentioned that Mahendra should be interrogated property and his total statement should be recorded. The statement of P.I, Allan D'Sa also reveals that he had conveyed to the driver that the deceased had taken sleeping tablets. Both the P.I. and P.S.I. who arrested Mahendra and kept him in police custody failed to examine him medically before placing him in detention since it was alleged that he had already consumed sleeping tablets. As by that time it was a known fact that Mahendra was likely to try to end his life the local police should have taken utmost care while putting him alone in the lock-up. He should have been therefore, kept under continuous watch. It further states that in all this the local police failed miserably and gave room for suspicion regarding the death of Mahendra. According to the Inquiry Officer the lapse on the part of the Goa Police and the most improper manner in which the accused was handled created doubts in the minds of the family members of the deceased as well as on the public with regard to the exact cause of his death. It was particularly emphasized that the lockup is meant for total security of an accused person. The report adds that soon after the hanging Police Constable Jaidev went into the washroom and saw the deceased hanging but no efforts were made to save his life. When P.S.I. Redkar found also the deceased hanging he himself concluded that Mahendra was dead. No doctor was called to find out whether he was dead or alive. The report adds that soon after the hanging Police Constable Jaidev went into the washroom and saw the deceased hanging but no efforts were made to save his life. When P.S.I. Redkar found also the deceased hanging he himself concluded that Mahendra was dead. No doctor was called to find out whether he was dead or alive. The view of the Inquiry Officer is that if any unnatural death occurs in the police lock-up the responsibility will go to the officer-in-charge of the Police Station and also to the senior most officers who supervised the crime. Had they taken necessary precautions the suicide would have been averted. On the basis of these observations it was found that P.I. Allan D'Sa, P.I. Redkar and police constable Jaidev Gauns were negligent in performing their duties in the case of the deceased Mahendra. 11. The bare perusal of this report of the C.B.I. shows that the conclusion arrived at by the Inquiry Officer is that had the concerned Police Officers taken necessary precautions the suicide would have been averted. Thus the finding appears to be that the three Police Officers of the State are guilty of clear sins of omission rather than commission thus making them responsible for the death of Mahendra. 12. We have given our anxious thought on this sensitive issue and we feel it difficult to share the extreme view taken by the Inquiry Officer with regard to the probable cause of Mahendra's death. We are of the opinion that the conclusion by itself oversteps the bounds of the ultimate scope of the inquiry which was solely meant to determine whether, at this initial stage of the proceedings, the death of Mahendra could be said as homicidal or instead it was a case of a simple suicide. Being so, it seems that the finding recorded by the Inquiry Officer that there was no evidence of any homicidal hanging consequent upon severe and merciless beating by the police as alleged by the petitioner and instead the death of Mahendra was a case of suicide would by itself serve the purpose for which the same was directed to be held. 13. 13. In our judgment it is too premature to rush through a judgment on the action of the Police Officers in this case and/or comment on the performance of their statutory duties in order to find them responsible in failing to take the necessary precautions or the required steps to spare the life of Mahendra and/or avoid his tragic death by hanging. With respect it seems to us that the whole effort of the C.B.I. in this direction appears to be an inconsistent exercise which was neither meant nor called for by this Court. 14. We fully appreciate that perhaps there could be a better understanding of the full situation by the investigation officers towards the plight of the deceased/accused which appears to be under sever pressure in view of his alleged involvement in the case of misappropriation of huge amounts of the Firm. Further the overzeal of the officers in obliging their superiors in respect of a complaint lodged by Mr. Subhnani directly before the Superintendent of Police, North, to whom he seems to be close, instead of his approaching the competent Police Station at Ponda is to be perceived and looked into in its proper perspective. It is only a matter of one's awareness towards his own duties and obligations vis-a-vis the question of hierarchical compulsions of subordinate officers which appear to be at stake in the instant case. If any action was sought to be swiftly taken against accused Mahendra consequent upon the complaint lodged by Mr. Subhnani to the Superintendent of Police in view of the seriousness of the offence alleged in the complaint it is difficult to take any exception or find fault with regard to this excessive enthusiasm on the part of the concerned Police Officers. We only wish that such zeal and concern could have been systematically displayed by every Investigation Officer in all cases irrespective of the fact that a complaint is sponsored or not by their immediate superiors. But just to blame an Investigating Agency for having done only its duty although some rules of procedure might have not been perhaps strictly adhered to in the process does not appear to be either a sound or a correct proposition. 15. The authority relied on by Mr. But just to blame an Investigating Agency for having done only its duty although some rules of procedure might have not been perhaps strictly adhered to in the process does not appear to be either a sound or a correct proposition. 15. The authority relied on by Mr. Sonak in the case of Joginder Kumar does not support the grievance of the petitioner as the same is attracted only in the particular facts of that case. The record of the investigation on the complaint of Mr. Subhnani suggests some involvement of Mahendra in the defalcation of the monies of the Firm and his own behaviour after the purported fraud was detected and an informal inquiry commenced on the matter points out, prima facie, to his guilty conscience which might have triggered a deep anxiety leading him to take the extreme step and get rid of his own life in order to avoid facing humiliation and the social discredit which his act was likely to cause to him. 16. So far the failure in rendering any medical assistance to Mahendra either before he was placed alone in the lock-up cell or after the police found him hanging in the toilet is concerned, we are of the view that this also does not call for interference inasmuch as this lapse on the part of the concerned officers could have been the outcome or a lack of proper appreciation of the real state of mind of the deceased at the time of his arrest while after the hanging the question of any medical assistance to a person found hanging, in a last attempt to save the life of an already dead person, appears to be just a hypothetical exercise in futility since admittedly in normal circumstances, clinical death by hanging is a quick process which does not take more than few seconds to produce its fatal effects. 17. It thus follows that as the petition stands the case sought to be made regarding cruel and heinous acts leading to the cold blooded murder of Mahendra by some Police Officers of the State, namely, P.I. Allan D'Sa, P.S.I. N.C. Raikar and A.S.I. Hari Redkar, has not been successfully established. Instead the report of the inquiry conducted by the C.B.I. clearly rules out any question of Mahendra's homicidal death and on the contrary speaks of a case of suicide. 18. Instead the report of the inquiry conducted by the C.B.I. clearly rules out any question of Mahendra's homicidal death and on the contrary speaks of a case of suicide. 18. This being the position, we do not find any reason to order criminal prosecution of the officials purported to be, directly or indirectly, involved in the incident of Mahendra's death and although deeply concerned and sympathetic to the misfortune of a sorrowful mother in the tragedy which struck her due to the loss of her son we feel ourselves powerless to grant to the petitioner any solace or actual relief by way of exemplary compensation as prayed for in the petition on the ground of violation of the deceased Mahendra's human rights. Our hope, however, was whether, bearing in mind the special circumstances surrounding this tragic episode in which a precious life of a promising man in the prime of his youth was lost in the precincts of a police lock up, irrespective of the ultimate causes which might have led to the unfortunate Mahendra to take the extreme step and commit suicide, the State Government was prepared to seriously give any ex gratia grant to the petitioner which might provide her some material benefit and at the same time help in mitigating in her distress the deprivation of financial assistance which her deceased son is said to be rendering to her. We inquired from Mr. Bhobe what would be the amount which the respondent No. 1 could consider to release in the petitioner's benefit on this account. Mr. Bhobe grossly indicated the mind of the Government in this regard and in all fairness left it to the Court to decide about the adequate relief to be granted. 19. In our judgment, an order to the State Government to make a payment to the petitioner of a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as an ex gratia payment purely on humanitarian basis, appears to meet the ends of justice in this case. We accordingly direct the State of Goa that such payment be done within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 20. In the result and subject to the above directions, the petition is dismissed. Rule made is accordingly discharged with, however, no order as to costs. 21. We accordingly direct the State of Goa that such payment be done within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 20. In the result and subject to the above directions, the petition is dismissed. Rule made is accordingly discharged with, however, no order as to costs. 21. We feel our duty to record once again a special word of praise to Advocate M. Sonak for the valuable assistance rendered to the Court and all the help given to the petitioner to adequately present her case in a proper manner. We fix his fees at Rs. 450/-. A copy of this judgment to be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State and the Inspector General of Police for necessary action and guidance. Order accordingly. *****