CW-1995-0003Hoshiarpur, PunjabJudgment 17 May 1995

Hariana Man vs State of Punjab

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana awarded Rs 1,00,000 compensation to the family of a Hariana man, who was eliminated in police custody. A Hariana man had been arrested on 30 December 1992 by Inspector of PS Hariana, and police subsequently claimed he escaped on 6 March 1993 while being led by Constable to recover hidden weapons. An inquiry conducted by the Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, rejected the police escape story and concluded that a Hariana man was in all probability eliminated by the police party. The High Court accepted the inquiry report and directed the State to pay compensation for the benefit of the deceased's four children, wife, and elderly parents. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 17 May 1995 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5 of 1995 In Criminal Writ Petition No. 125 of 1993, the Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: V.S. Aggarwal, J.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Inspector, Hariana Police Station; Constable, Hariana Police Station, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).

Register number
PB 07 CW 0001
Case reference
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5 of 1995 In Criminal Writ Petition No. 125 of 1993 / (1995) 3 RCR (Criminal) 110
Court and date
Punjab and Haryana High Court (Coram: V.S. Aggarwal, J.), 17 May 1995
Officer(s) at the material time
Inspector, Hariana Police Station; Constable, Hariana Police Station
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Finding of the Court (extract)
“On 11.8.1994, a Single Bench of this Court directed that a case be registered against [name withheld], SHO incharge of the police station and the police party headed by him. It was further directed that investigation should be conducted by …” (at para 4)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment dated 17 May 1995 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“On 11.8.1994, a Single Bench of this Court directed that a case be registered against [name withheld], SHO incharge of the police station and the police party headed by him. It was further directed that investigation should be conducted by …” (para 4)

Institutional response

1
17 May 1995

Order issued

Concluded
Punjab and Haryana High Court External · Binding

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: (1995) 3 RCR (Criminal) 110
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.