Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.
Anjalam, widow of a Padalur man, alleged her husband was tortured and killed in August 1995 by Padalur police and the death staged as suicide by hanging from a neem tree (body found 04.08.1995; post-mortem placed death between 02-03.08.1995). The Division Bench set aside the Single Judge order, quashed the RDO/IG suicide findings, and found the police party headed by Inspector with P[name withheld] and [name withheld] and driver [name withheld] answerable for the murder. It directed the State to pay Rs.5,00,000 compensation within six weeks, recoverable as Rs.2,00,000 from the Inspector and Rs.1,00,000 each from the other three, and transferred Cr. No.171/1995 (Kunnam P.S.) to the CBI for fresh investigation. The Court noted that no action had yet been initiated against the officers (para 20). Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
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 →By judgment dated 18 June 2013 in W.A. No.2578 of 2003, the Madras High Court (Coram: Elipe Dharma Rao, N. Kirubakaran, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 4 police personnel, namely: Inspector of Police, Padalur Police Station, Perambalur District; Police Constable, Padalur Police Station, Perambalur District; Police Constable, Perambalur District; Police Driver, Padalur Police Station, Perambalur District, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 5 lakh (Rs 5,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Madras High Court judgment dated 18 June 2013 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
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.
Holding not recorded separately.
“Since it is our finding that the police party headed by the third respondent and accompanied by the respondents 4 to 6 are answerable to the murder of the deceased, we direct the second respondent, Government of Tamil Nadu, to …” (para 28)
The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 500,000.
(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.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.