Judgment :- The petitioner had filed the above petition directing the 1st and 3rd Respondents to take steps for getting the relevant provisions under Act 33 of 1989 included in Crime No.15/98 on the file of the Kirumampakkam police station, Pondichery and to entrust the investigation to an officer as indicated under Rule 7 of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities ) Rules, 1995, and also (2) directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents to pay the relief amounts for the death of the 2nd petitioners brother Gothandam due to the torture by the police and for the fracture of the second petitioners right hand and other injuries which resulted in severe pain and sufferings, (3) Directing the 1st respondent to pay fair and just amount as compensation for the death of Gothandam and fracture of the right hand of the 2nd petitioner, Venugopal; (4) Directing the 1st and 3rd respondents to provide all the copies of the documents which are furnished to the accused free of costs after final report is filed in the Court; (5) Issuing any other directions as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. .2. Supporting the petition , the 2nd petitioner had filed an affidavit which reads as follows:- .That the death of the 2nd petitioners brother one Gothandam happened under police custody on 12. 1998. He was 21 years old. The petitioner’s family belongs to scheduled caste and involved in agricultural operations as coolies; On 12. 1998 at 3.00am, the said Gothandam was picked up by 3 constables to Kirumambakkam police station. The petitioner was also brought to the police station and he witnessed the beating of Gothandam by the police by way of 3rd degree methods. The petitioner was also beaten by the police. The petitioners wife and his mother were crying and shouting at the police station. The news spread throughout the area and large number of people assembled in front of the police station. The petitioner was admitted in the hospital and discharged on 12. 1998. .3. The Inspector of Police, Bahour Circle, Pondicherry, registered the F.I.R in Crime No.15 of 1998 on 12. 1998 as 16.50 hours under Section 176 Cr.P.C. Gothandam was taken to Government Hospital, Pondicherry for treatment, where he was declared as brought dead by the doctor. Further, the Magistrate conducted an inquiry in this regard. 1998. .3. The Inspector of Police, Bahour Circle, Pondicherry, registered the F.I.R in Crime No.15 of 1998 on 12. 1998 as 16.50 hours under Section 176 Cr.P.C. Gothandam was taken to Government Hospital, Pondicherry for treatment, where he was declared as brought dead by the doctor. Further, the Magistrate conducted an inquiry in this regard. The Inspector of Police filed a petition before the Judicial Magistrate, Pondicherry as 3. 1998 for getting the provisions altered into the Sections 302, 177, 201, 323, 324 IPC r/w 34 I.PC. It was also mentioned that the petitioners brother, Gothandam died due to the 3rd degree acts exercised by the police on him and the accused were named as 1) C.Angappan 2)Ethiraj 3)Veerappan, 4) Govindan and 5) Ramanathan, all being police personnel. The Government of Pondicherry paid Rs.60, 000/- as ex-gratia payment for the death of the said Gothandam due to police torture. The petitioner was not paid any relief amount for the pain and suffering caused by the police. On 20.2.1998, the petitioner sent representations to the authorities including the Respondents herein. The incident also is attracted under the provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. But the Respondent did not take any action, since all the accused are upper caste persons. 4. The petitioner cited similar cases in .(1) Mariammal..vs.. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 1998, Law Weekly Criminal. .(2) Vijaya..vs.. State of Tamil Nadu, unreported Judgement in Crl.O.P.No. 167 of 1998, dated 14. 1999. 5. Further, the petitioner contended that the 1st Respondent ought to have paid 1, 50,000/- immediately after the postmortem was conducted on his brother after his death. The petitioner should have been paid relief amount or other reliefs provided under the SC/ST Rules, 1995. Further, the petitioner has prayed for Rs.5, 00,000/-as compensation for the death of his brother. Supporting the petitioner case, he has filed four documents. 6. The Respondents filed counter statement and denied all the allegations. The Respondents submitted that the petitioners brother was brought to the said police station with regard to the interrogation of a case in Crime No.11 of 1998 registered for the offence under Sections 454 and 380 IPC. Supporting the petitioner case, he has filed four documents. 6. The Respondents filed counter statement and denied all the allegations. The Respondents submitted that the petitioners brother was brought to the said police station with regard to the interrogation of a case in Crime No.11 of 1998 registered for the offence under Sections 454 and 380 IPC. After registering the case initially under Section 176 Cr.P.C, a Magisterial enquiry was conducted with regard to the death of Gothandam who was brought for interrogation in Crime No.11 of 98 under Section 454 and 380 I.P.C by the Kiuimmambakkam police station. The Magistrate conducted enquiry and submitted report on 3. 1998 to the Superintendent of Police (South), wherein he had implicated the involvement of the police personnel in the torture and death of the deceased Gothandam. The Inspector of Police, Mr. Nandagopal, altered the Sections in Crime No.15 of 98 from 176 Cr.P.C to 302, 177, 201, 323, 324, 326 I.P.C r/w 34 I.P.C against 5 accused persons namely a)C.Angappan, b)Ethiraj, c) Veerappan d)Govindan and e)Ramanathan ,all attached to Kirumambakkam police station. The Senior Superintendent of Police (Law and Order) on 3. 1998 ordered the Superintendent of Police (CID), Pondicherry, to take up further investigation and ordered the Superintendent of Police(South), to hand over the case to Superintendent of Police (CID), Pondicherry. Pursuant to such direction proceedings dated 3. 1998, the case in Crime No.15/98 was transmitted to the Superintendent of Police, CID (Pondicherry) on 3. 1998. 7. The Superintendent of Police (CID) upon receipt of the case filed regarding Crime No.15 of 1998, preceded with the investigation. Further, on the direction of the Superintendent of Police (CID), the Respondents took up further investigation of case in Crime No.15 of 1998. After examination of witnesses, the investigation was submitted to the Director of prosecution for finalizing the draft charge sheet. The Director of prosecution, Pondicherry, upon giving a careful consideration to the investigation conducted by the Respondents had given his opinion that final report can be filed as against the 5 accused persons mentioned above against the alleged said offence. The legal opinion from the Director of Prosecution was obtained in the month of September 1999. Further, the final report will be committed to the near future. Among the 5 accused, Veerappan, who is one among them died on 26. 1998. The legal opinion from the Director of Prosecution was obtained in the month of September 1999. Further, the final report will be committed to the near future. Among the 5 accused, Veerappan, who is one among them died on 26. 1998. The Kirummambakkam police did not pick on Gothandam because he was scheduled caste person. But actually, a case was registered against his for theft. 8. In this view of the matter, the contention of the petitioner, to the effect that the provision of the Act, 1989, should have been incorporated in the said Crime No.15 of 1998 are not sustainable. The ex-gratia payment of Rs.60, 000/-paid to the deceased Gothandam was not on the basis of the caste. But the amount has been paid due to lack of ingredients in the said case. 9. Considering the contentions of both the sides and arguments of the respective counsels, the Court is of the view that the Respondent has categorically admitted that the Magistrate conducted enquiry and submitted a report to the Superintendent of Police (South), wherein he had implicated the involvement of police personnel in the torture and death of the deceased Gothandam. The Inspector of Police, Nandagopal had altered the Section in Crime No.15 of 1998 from 176 Cr.P.C to 302, 177, 201, 323, 324, 326 I.P.C r/w 34 I.P.C against 5 accused persons namely a)C.Angappan, b)Ethiraj, c)Veerappan d)Govindan and e)Ramanathan ,all attached to Kirumambakkam police station. So, the concerned authorities had initiated legal action in accordance with law against the accused persons. 10. Under the circumstances. The Court directs the Chief Secretary, Government of Pondicherry, to give suitable directions to the concerned authorities to speed up the cases. This Court is not inclined to grant the relief sought by the petitioner. Accordingly, the above Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.