The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) allowed the writ petition, holding there was a clear violation of the D.K. Basu mandate and sufficient material to infer that a Koregaon, Taluka Kaij man was subjected to custodial violence after being picked up on 26-08-2015 and dying the same day in Shivajinagar police custody. The court disbelieved the police story that he jumped from a running police van near Massajog, citing unrecorded detention, no medical examination, no intimation to relatives, and tampered handcuff-register entries. It awarded Rs 5,00,000 compensation (Rs 2 lakh FD for the widow, Rs 50,000 for the father, Rs 50,000 FD for each of five minor children) with liberty to recover from the erring officials, directed registration of a Section 302 read with 34 IPC crime against the four policemen with State CID investigation monitored by the ADG CID Pune, and initiated suo motu contempt against PHC Rathod. 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 16 August 2018 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1451 of 2015, the Bombay High Court (Coram: S. S. Shinde, V. K. Jadhav, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 4 police personnel, namely: Shankar P. Rathod (Police Head Constable (Buckle 502)); Police Naik (Badge 1277), Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed; Police Naik (Badge 1490), Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed; Police Constable (Badge 2157), Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed, 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 Bombay High Court judgment dated 16 August 2018 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.
“There is clear violation of mandate laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of D.K. Basu (supra), as much as prima facie, there is sufficient material to draw inference that deceased [name withheld] was subjected to custodial violence.” (para 20)
The Bombay 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.
