Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1183 (PNJ)

Varinder Kaur v. State Of Punjab

2002-11-12

K.S.GAREWAL

body2002
Judgment K.S.Garewal, J. 1. On March 19, 1997 this court had issued a direction instituting an inquiry to be conducted by the learned Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur into the disappearance of Balwinder Singh, Gurbachan Singh and Palvinder Singh. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur submitted his report dated September 4, 1997 concluding that although it has not been established that the three missing persons had been abducted by ASI Gurmit Singh and C. Mohan Singh, but it appeared from the evidence that they had been abducted by the police. Therefore, on August 3, 1998 this court entrusted inquiry/investigation of the case to Central Bureau of Investigation. In the meanwhile, the petitioners filed Cr. Misc. 275 of 1998 for grant of compensation of Rs. 3.00 lacs each to the heirs of the three missing persons payable by the State. 2. The C.B.I. registered a case RC-18(S)/98/CBI/STU-XV/CHG on September 4, 1998 under Sections 364/34 IPC. After completion of investigation charge- sheet was filed before the court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Patiala on January 3, 2001 against DSP Prithpal Singh, ASI Gurmit Singh and C. Mohan Singh, all of Punjab Police who were posted as PS Sadar Batala at the relevant time. Consequently, the proceedings have been initiated against the said accused persons, which shall be decided in due course of law. However, the question of payment of compensation to the heirs of the deceased is still to be decided. 3. Cr. Misc. 275 of 1998 relates to the question of compensation. Therein it has been pleaded that the evidence produced by the petitioners before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, disclosed that police officials were responsible for the abduction and elimination of the three missing persons. Reliance was placed on Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, 1994(1) RCR 18; D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1997(1) RCR 372; Navkiran Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 242-258/94 (decided by Honble Supreme Court of India on November 4, 1998), Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association v. State of Punjab, 1996(3) RCR 773; Tarlochan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1996(3) RCR 753; Joga Singh v. State of Punjab, 1997(2) RCR 809; Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab, 2001(3) RCR 569 and Karnail Singh v. State of Punjab and others, Cr. Misc. 14150-M of 1994 decided by this Court on September 11, 2001. 4. Misc. 14150-M of 1994 decided by this Court on September 11, 2001. 4. Compensation for death in police custody is an independent remedy which the heirs of the deceased are entitled to irrespective of the outcome of the criminal trial. At the trial the accused persons face a criminal charge, if the charge is established the accused face conviction and sentence, they may also become liable to payment of compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. The relief which the petitioners are claiming is not against the accused but against the State. The weight of the legal precedence is in favour of the petitioners and entitles them to be suitably compensated by the State and this is irrespective of whether the charge against the accused is established or not. It is tempting to give details of the charge-sheet/final report filed by the C.B.I. but judicial prudence refrains this court from making any reference to the charge-sheet for fear of causing prejudice to the accused at the trial. However, the fact of the matter is that charge-sheet has been filed against DSP Prithpal Singh, ASI Gurmit Singh and C. Mohan Singh for offences u/s 120-B read with Sections 364 and 342 IPC for which the accused are facing trial. 5. The only question to be determined in this case is the quantum of compensation to be paid to the heirs of the three deceased. In Navkiran Singhs case (supra) the Honble Supreme Court of India had awarded Rs. 10.00 lacs as compensation to the mother of Jagwinder Singh, Advocate to be paid by the State of Punjab through Chief Secretary. In Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association v. State of Punjab (supra) the Honble Supreme Court of India had directed Punjab Government through Secretary to Government, Punjab, Home Department to pay a sum of Rs. 2.00 lacs to Harpreet Singh as compensation for his false implication for the murder of Kulwant Singh and detention. In Tarlochan Singhs case (supra) this court had directed payment of Rs. 3.00 lacs to the hirs of the deceased. Similarly in Joga Singhs case (supra) this court had directed payment of Rs. 3.00 lacs to the heirs of the deceased. Likewise also in Pritam Singhs case (supra) and in case and in Karnail Singhs case (supra) this court had directed the payment of compensation. 6. From the above it appears that Rs. Similarly in Joga Singhs case (supra) this court had directed payment of Rs. 3.00 lacs to the heirs of the deceased. Likewise also in Pritam Singhs case (supra) and in case and in Karnail Singhs case (supra) this court had directed the payment of compensation. 6. From the above it appears that Rs. 3.00 lacs has been fixed as fair compensation payable to the heirs of the person who was allegedly abducted by the police and later allegedly eliminated. This appears to be a good standard of compensation in contemporary India and can be safely followed. 7. In view of the above this petition is accepted and a sum of Rs. 3.00 lacs each is hereby awarded to the respective petitioners/heirs whose details are mentioned in paragraph 4 of the application. The amount shall be paid by the State of Punjab through Chief Secretary. It shall be paid within 2 months from today. The amount shall be shared equally by the respective heirs. The shares of the minors shall be deposited in a bank to be released to them on attaining majority. However, in case early release of compensation is required for purposes of education or marriage, the guardian of the minor may apply giving sound reasons. 8. It is further directed that deposit of compensation and its disbursement shall be done under the supervision of Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur. If any application for early release of payment is to be presented, the same shall also be presented before the learned Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur and disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge.