This application has been filed by the mother of one Kamal Bhattacharyya who is alleged to have been killed by the Armed force on 1.5.92. There is the prayer to pay a sum of Rs.5 (five) lakhs to the petitioner as compensation for the brutal killing of Kamal Bhattacharyya by the Army personnel and/or for other reliefs. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows. 3. That on 1.5.92 at about 10.30 PM a number of Army personnel raided the residence of the relative of the petitioner at Panbazar, Guwahati where the son of the petitioner Kamal Bhattacharyya stayed for some days for medical treatment. It is alleged that after the arrest, Kamal was taken away by the Army personnel to Baharghat Army Camp in the district of Nalbari. It is further alleged that the Kamal was brutally tortured and assaulted by the Army force in the Army camp. On 2.5.92 Kamal was brought by Army to his native village Agangmow. He was brought near his residence and he was asked to stand. It was however, not possible for him to stand up as he sustained grievous injury all over his body due to brutal attack of the Army personnel. Thereafter, he was dragged to nearby field where he was kept in a standing position by two Army personnel by holding his two hands from two sides. In front of a large number of villagers one Army personnel shot at him and as a result Kamal died on the spot. The Army personnel left the dead body of Kamal in the open filed. After five hours, the Deputy Commissioner, Nalbari came with a number of Army personnel and took away the body for postmortem to Nalbari Town Hospital. The body was handed over to the family members of the deceased after postmortem, and brought to the residence of the petitioner. Thereafter, the cremation was performed. 4. At the time of death Kamal was aged about 24 years. He had passed the HSLC Examination in the year 1985 securing First Division with letter marks in Mathematics. He obtained Diploma in Civil Engineering from the Assam Engineering Institute at Guwahati. In the Institute, he acquired three certificates in extra carrieular activities. It is alleged that the Kamal, was murdered in a cold blooded manner by the Army. 5. He had passed the HSLC Examination in the year 1985 securing First Division with letter marks in Mathematics. He obtained Diploma in Civil Engineering from the Assam Engineering Institute at Guwahati. In the Institute, he acquired three certificates in extra carrieular activities. It is alleged that the Kamal, was murdered in a cold blooded manner by the Army. 5. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2. In the affidavit-in-opposition in paragraph 5 it is stated that while he was leading to Army for recovery of arms and on the way he was shot at while trying to escape from Army custody after giving him repeated warning. It is further claimed in this affidavit-in-opposition that he was a Member of the ULFA organisation and a numbers of police cases were pending against him. 6. Thereafter, this writ application was filed and this Court passed an interim order to pay Rs.30,000/- by way of cash payment and that amount has been paid by the Army. 7. This matter was sent for an enquiry by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nalbari and the learned Judge submitted a report on 25.3.95 after examining a number of witnesses. Before the learned Judge, the following witnesses were examined: (i) Smti Snehalata Devi, Petitioner (ii) ShrtiBhabes Deka (iii) Shri Basistha Patowari (iv) Shri Nawfhan Kalita (v) Shri Amarendra Talukdar (vi) Shri Bharath Talukdar (vii) Shri Shri SP Kar (viii) Shri JN Sarma and (ix) Dr. BK Sarma 8. As admitted by the mother in the deposition, Kamal was a hardcore ULFA activist. That is also evident from the Journal which was filed in this case. The learned District Judge on consideration of the evidence and other materials came to the following findings : "In the light of my aforesaid elaborate discussion of the entire evidence on record I hereby submit my findings by holding that killing of Kamal Bhatta intentionally and deliberately by the Army has not been proved by the petitioner by adducing reliable and cogent evidence to that effect and as such, defence story of killing of Kamal under a peculiar circumstance that has been narrated above cannot be ruled out." 9. I have heard Shri SN Medhi, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri AR Barthakur, learned Advocate for the Army and Shri KN Choudhury, learned Advocate for the Union of India, Shri Medhi in support of his claim for compensation and/or for cash payment places reliance on the following decisions : (i) (1995) 3 SCC 757 (Dhananjay Sharma vs. State of Haryana & others). That was a case where the petitioner while going by taxi was waylaid by the State Police though he was not wanted in any case and he was detained in Police Station for two days. A CBI enquiry was directed and the CBI reported that it is a fact that the petitioner was waylaid by the State Police and thereafter he was detained there for two days. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court came to the finding that the State must be held responsible for the unlawful acts of its officers for violating their fundamental rights and personal liberty without any authority of law and in absolutely high handed manner but no compensation in that case was granted as it was found by the Supreme Court that the petitioner Sri Dhananjay Sharma has exaggerated the incident. So, this case in spite of helping the petitioner goes as against him. (ii) (1993) 2 SCC 746 (Nilabati Behera (Smti) Alias Lalita Behera (through the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee) vs. State of Orissa & others). That was a case where the son of the petitioner who was aged about 22 years was taken into police custody at about 8 AM on December 1, 1987 in connection with the investigation of an offence of theft in the village. He was handcuffed, tied and kept in custody in the police station where the police constables and some other persons were present on that night. The dead body of the deceased with handcuffed and multiple injuries was found by some railway men lying on the railway truck on the morning of December 2, 1987. The mother of the deceased sent a letter dated September 14,1988 to the Supreme Court alleging custodial death of her son and claiming compensation on ground of violation of Article 21. The District Judge was asked to hold an enquiry into the matter and submit a report. The mother of the deceased sent a letter dated September 14,1988 to the Supreme Court alleging custodial death of her son and claiming compensation on ground of violation of Article 21. The District Judge was asked to hold an enquiry into the matter and submit a report. The District Judge submitted the report containing his findings based on evidence led by the parties that the deceased had died on account of multiple injuries inflicted on him while he was in police custody. Two questions arose for decision before the Supreme Court: (1) Whether it was a case of custodial death ? and (2) Whether the respondents were liable for compensation to the mother of the deceased for the custodial death. The Supreme Court answered both the questions in affirmative and allowed the petition granting compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- (one lac fifty thousand) only to the mother of the deceased and another sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only as cost to be paid to the Supreme Court Aid Committee. 10. In the case before us, the finding of the learned District Judge is that it is not a case of brutal killing by the Army, rather he has given the opinion that the case put forth by the Army cannot be ruled out. So, this Court in exercise of the power under Article 226 without being satisfied regarding the custodial death cannot award compensation as claimed. 11. 1993 (1) GLJ 340 (Smti Geeta Sangma vs. State of Nagaland & others). That also was a case of compensation for custodial death. The High Court found that the husband of the petitioner was beaten to death in the lock up by the police personnels on duty. The High Court directed the Govt. to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lac fifty thousand) only in the nature of palliative. In that case also the clear finding was that the person died in the custody. 12. (1991) 2 GLR 347 [1991 (2) GLJ 54] (Bihar Timung vs. Union of India & others). That was a case where sister of the petitioner died by hanging. There was an allegation that she was sexually assaulted by the Army personnel and there was a further allegation that after being sexually assaulted, she was killed by the Army personnel and kept her hanging in her quarter. That was a case where sister of the petitioner died by hanging. There was an allegation that she was sexually assaulted by the Army personnel and there was a further allegation that after being sexually assaulted, she was killed by the Army personnel and kept her hanging in her quarter. The death of the deceased by hanging herself was disputed. The Court ordered for CBI inquiry and directed that an amount of Rs.2.00 (two lacs) will be given as cash compensation and it was further directed that the Union of India and the State of Assam shall be jointly and severally liable for the payment of compensation. In a this case also there was a dispute regarding the cause of death of the sister of the petitioner but in spite of it, the Court gave an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lacs) only as palliative. 13. In order to satisfy myself, I looked at the evidence, Smti Snehalata Devi witness No. 1 is not an eye witness. Witness No.2 deposed inter alia as follows : "It was about 6.30 AM there was an Army vehicle in front of the house of Sarat Kalita. From southern side a military jeep was coming and sloped near the Army vehicle. I saw a body taken by Army personnel from the vehicle. I have heard a sound and thereafter I saw the body falling down on the ground and immediately after the occurrence Army personnel left the place with the vehicle. Thereafter I approached to the village and found that dead body of the boy was of Kamal. I noticed a rope in his right hand. I saw the occurrence from 15/16 feet distance." PW 3 deposed inter alia as follows : "I saw a boy taking from the vehicle by Army the boy was weak and he was made standing Army personnel by catching in his two hands facing him towards northern side and was surrendered by Army men with guns in their hands. At that time I heard a sound and thereafter both vehicles left the place. After departure Army personnel I proceeded to place of occurrence and saw that a boy was killed by Army was Kamal of our village." PW 4 deposed inter alia as follows : "At the time I saw a boy getting down from the vehicle by the Army personnel by touching in his arms. After departure Army personnel I proceeded to place of occurrence and saw that a boy was killed by Army was Kamal of our village." PW 4 deposed inter alia as follows : "At the time I saw a boy getting down from the vehicle by the Army personnel by touching in his arms. At that time, I have he?rd a sound coming from the side of the vehicle. At that time there was a light raining and I saw the vehicle going away from the spot where it was kept. Thereafter, I proceeded to the place of occurrence where the dead body was kept and saw Kamal Bhatta lying death in the field." PW 5 deposed inter alia as follows : "At that time I went to discharge stool in the jungle and saw a vehicle and Army personnel getting down from the vehicle, and were going towards the field. At that time I have heard a sound from a distance of near about 20 meter and thereafter, I saw Kamal Bhatta lying death." PW 6 deposed inter alia as follows : "I know Kamal Bhatta. He died in the year 1992. I saw two Army vehicle coming towards our village and crossed our house. One of the vehicles stopped there and another one went away towards the village Dokoha. The vehicle which went towards Dokoha again came back, and stopped near the vehicle which stopped earlier. At that time a boy was escorted towards the field from the vehicle which was coming from the side of Dokoha. At that time we have heard a sound. On hearing the same we proceeded to the place to see the occurrence and by this time both the vehicles left the spot. On the P/O we saw Kamal Bhatta lying death, and upper facing. I saw a lungi and a gangi in his body along with a rope in his hand, and also a hole in the chest." 14. None deposed in the enquiry on behalf of the Army authority. A perusal of the statements quoted above will show that Kamal Bhatta was brutally killed by the Army. It is a fact that Kamal Bhatta was hardcore ULFA but that does not give a right to the Army to kill him as alleged. None deposed in the enquiry on behalf of the Army authority. A perusal of the statements quoted above will show that Kamal Bhatta was brutally killed by the Army. It is a fact that Kamal Bhatta was hardcore ULFA but that does not give a right to the Army to kill him as alleged. So, I find that the findings of the learned District Judge on this point is absolutely perverse and against the evidence on record. This Court asked the District Judge to hold an enquiry and the evidence that was adduced before him shall be part of this case and this Court can look to the evidence as was done by the Supreme Court in the case of Lilabati Behra (supra). 15. This being the position and looking into the background of the deceased, I am not inclined to give any compensation but wants to give some payment by way of palliative to the mother. Earlier she has been paid an amount of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only and further sum of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand) only will paid to her by the respondent Nos. l and 2. The payment shall be made within a period of four months from today. 16. This disposes of the writ application.