5 Jan 2010
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: (2010) 01 MAD CK 0048
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2010-0020Salem, Tamil NaduJudgment 5 January 2010
Salem Man, [name withheld] and [name withheld] v. National Human Rights Commission and State of Tamil Nadu
The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. Remand prisoner a Salem man hanged himself on 24 December 2000 in the strong room of Mohan Kumaramangalam Government Medical College Hospital, Salem, while the three petitioner-policemen were in charge of the guard. The RDO enquiry under PSO 145 and the NHRC found the death in judicial custody was due to the negligence of the strong-room police personnel, and the State paid Rs.50,000 interim compensation to the next of kin. The State ordered recovery of the amount from the three policemen in instalments along with a departmental warning. The court dismissed their writ petitions, holding the States pecuniary loss recoverable from those responsible, with liberty to seek refund if the pending NHRC proceedings exonerate them.
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 →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 5 January 2010 in W.P. Nos. 27281 to 27283 of 2009, the Madras High Court (Coram: K. Chandru, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against 3 police personnel, namely: Head Constable, Control Room; Grade-I Police Constable, Central Crime Branch; Grade-I Police Constable, Fainance Police Station, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 50,000.
- Register number
- TN 27 CW 0004
- Case reference
- W.P. Nos. 27281 to 27283 of 2009 / (2010) 01 MAD CK 0048
- Court and date
- Madras High Court (Coram: K. Chandru, J.), 5 January 2010
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Control Room; Grade-I Police Constable, Central Crime Branch; Grade-I Police Constable, Fainance Police Station
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Article 21 of the Constitution of India; Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Section 18(3) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Therefore, there is no difficulty for the respondents in ordering recovery, since payment of interim compensation was a loss to the State. Such a pecuniary loss can always be directed to be recovered from the persons, who are responsible.” (at para 13)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine. Compensation: Rs 50,000.
- 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.
Current position
The Madras High Court judgment dated 5 January 2010 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
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.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Therefore, there is no difficulty for the respondents in ordering recovery, since payment of interim compensation was a loss to the State. Such a pecuniary loss can always be directed to be recovered from the persons, who are responsible.” (para 13)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
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.