Babuwatch A Data Libertarian Project
CW-2011-0012Gondia, MaharashtraJudgment 12 July 2011

Gondia Police Police Sub-Inspector v. State of Maharashtra

The Nagpur Bench upheld the convictions of a Sub-Inspector and six constables for the custodial torture and homicidal death of theft suspect [name withheld] at Gondia City station in December 1995, whose body was burnt to screen the offence. The Court held all charges proved except destruction of evidence regarding the dead body, maintaining the sentences including seven years under Section 304-II, and dismissed the State's appeal for murder charges. The Supreme Court later delivered a split verdict on 25.09.2024 (2024 INSC 734) and referred the matter to a larger bench, where it remains pending.

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 12 July 2011 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 64, 65, 71, 76, 77 and 88 of 1997, the Bombay High Court (Coram: A.H. Joshi, J.) affirmed the conviction of 7 police personnel, namely: Police Sub-Inspector; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable.

Register number
MH 35 CW 0003
Case reference
Criminal Appeal Nos. 64, 65, 71, 76, 77 and 88 of 1997
Court and date
Bombay High Court (Coram: A.H. Joshi, J.), 12 July 2011
Officer(s) at the material time
Police Sub-Inspector; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable; Police Constable
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 331 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 330 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 348 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 218 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 202 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“In the result, this Court concludes that based on facts proved by the prosecution, it has succeeded in proving all charges, except the proof of destruction of evidence as regards dead body.” (at para 111)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 7 years.
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 Bombay High Court judgment dated 12 July 2011 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Evidence position

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.

Attributed to the court

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“In the result, this Court concludes that based on facts proved by the prosecution, it has succeeded in proving all charges, except the proof of destruction of evidence as regards dead body.” (para 111)
Separate from verification

Institutional response

2
Date not established

Conviction

Concluded
Trial court (as recorded in the Bombay High Court judgment) External · Binding

The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Bombay High Court judgment.

Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: Criminal Appeal Nos. 64, 65, 71, 76, 77 and 88 of 1997
Not yet re-checked.
12 Jul 2011

Order issued

Concluded
Bombay High Court External · Binding

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.

Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: Criminal Appeal Nos. 64, 65, 71, 76, 77 and 88 of 1997
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record

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.