CW-2008-0018East Delhi, DelhiJudgment 5 March 2008

State vs Delhi Police SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police) and others

The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. After Constable of PS Vivek Vihar was stabbed on 16.8.1987, police detained family members and neighbours, and on 24.8.1987 a Delhi man and [name withheld] were brought to the station where SHO and others at his instance severely beat them; a Delhi man died the next day at LNJP Hospital and an SDM inquest indicted the officers. The trial court (SC No. 01/2006, ASJ Karkardooma, December 2006) convicted [name withheld] under Sections 302/342/120-B IPC and sentenced him to death. The High Court declined the death reference, holding murderous intent not proved but sustaining culpability for the homicidal custodial death, and convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC with 8 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs 2,00,000 fine payable to the deceased's mother [name withheld]. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal on 12.11.2009 (Crl.A. Nos. 1440-1441/2008). 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 5 March 2008 in Death Sentence Reference with connected Criminal Appeal (numbers unverified), the Delhi High Court recorded the conviction of the SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police), PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 2 lakh (Rs 2,00,000).

Register number
DL 07 CW 0003
Case reference
Death Sentence Reference with connected Criminal Appeal (numbers unverified) / 153 (2008) DLT 693
Court and date
Delhi High Court, 5 March 2008
Officer(s) at the material time
SHO (later Assistant Commissioner of Police), PS Vivek Vihar, Delhi Police
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“RE-SOURCE: current quote matches SC judgment para 1 recital, not the cited HC judgment; replace with a verbatim passage from the HC 05.03.2008 text once opened” (at para null (must be set from HC text))
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Conviction entered by High Court. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 8 years. Compensation: Rs 2 lakh (Rs 2,00,000).
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 Delhi High Court judgment dated 5 March 2008 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
Custodial deathPrimary
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.

“RE-SOURCE: current quote matches SC judgment para 1 recital, not the cited HC judgment; replace with a verbatim passage from the HC 05.03.2008 text once opened” (para null (must be set from HC text))

Institutional response

1
5 Mar 2008

Order issued

Concluded
Delhi High Court External · Binding

The Delhi High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.

Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: 153 (2008) DLT 693
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.