Order issued
ConcludedThe Bombay High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.
The judgment of the Bombay High Court records the following account. The petitioner, a civil engineer from Airoli (Navi Mumbai), was picked up by Ambad police on 12 April 2014 in a dowry complaint case but produced before the Magistrate only on 14 April 2014, and was also subjected to a forced medical examination. The Division Bench held his detention from 3 p.m. on 13 April to 11 a.m. on 14 April 2014 and the medical examination illegal, in violation of Articles 21 and 22(2) of the Constitution. The court held that compensation in public law for such violations is a strict liability, relying on D.K. Basu and Nilabati Behera. It allowed the writ with Rs 2,00,000 compensation plus Rs 20,000 costs on the State, directed a major-penalty inquiry against ASI with recovery of the payout, and left tort, section 357 CrPC and Arnesh Kumar contempt remedies open. 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 9 June 2015 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 725 of 2014, the Bombay High Court (Coram: T.V. Nalawade, Indira Jain, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 3 police personnel, namely: Assistant Sub-Inspector, Ambad Police Station, Jalna; Police Inspector, Ambad Police Station, Jalna; Police Head Constable, Ambad Police Station, Jalna, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 2 lakh (Rs 2,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Bombay High Court judgment dated 9 June 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.
“The detention of the petitioner from 3.00 p.m. of 13.4.2014 to 11.00 a.m. of 14.4.2014 in the custody of respondent No. 2 is held to be illegal, the medical examination of petitioner was also illegal and it was in violation …” (para Order clause (iii))
The Bombay High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 200,000.
(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.