Order issued
ConcludedThe Calcutta High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.
The judgment of the Calcutta High Court records the following account. Jadavpur University professor a Kolkata man and his neighbour a Kolkata man were manhandled by a mob and then arrested by Purba Jadavpur police on the night of 12 April 2012 for circulating an email cartoon featuring the Chief Minister, spending the night in custody for bailable and non-cognizable offences. The State defended the detention as protective custody and rejected the WBHRC recommendation of Rs 50,000 compensation each plus departmental action. The Calcutta High Court held the arrests were in brazen violation of law, called the protective-custody plea a bogey, and upheld the WBHRC recommendation by awarding Rs 50,000 each plus Rs 50,000 costs. It directed disciplinary proceedings against the two respondent officers (R-4 and R-5, names redacted in the reported text) to be initiated within a month and taken to a logical conclusion. 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 10 March 2015 in W.P. No. 33241 (W) of 2013, the Calcutta High Court (Coram: Dipankar Datta, J.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Sub-Inspector (R-4), Purba Jadavpur Police Station, Kolkata Police; Additional Officer-in-Charge (R-5), Purba Jadavpur Police Station, Kolkata Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Calcutta High Court judgment dated 10 March 2015 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.
“Relief claimed is moulded by declaring that the petitioners' human rights were indeed violated by public servants; consequently, the State Government shall adequately compensate the petitioners. They shall be entitled to Rs. 50,000/- each as compensatory relief, to be released …” (para 71)
The Calcutta High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.
(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.