CW-2020-0003Madurai, Tamil NaduJudgment 21 January 2020

The State of Tamil Nadu Sholavandan Man

The Madras High Court Division Bench dismissed the State appeal against the Single Judge order dated 2 July 2012 awarding Rs 1 lakh to taxi driver [name withheld]. The Court recorded that a Sholavandan man was called to Kadupatti police station on 17 April 2003 for enquiry into a missing-girl case and was repeatedly beaten, including having his right thumb tied and fractured, until 21-22 April 2003. The Court noted the Principal District and Sessions Judge had already convicted Inspector M. Kalifulla under Section 324 IPC read with Section 30 of the Human Rights Act. Holding the State vicariously liable and that public-law compensation is additional to criminal-court relief, the Court upheld the Rs 1 lakh award. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

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 →

Report card

By judgment dated 21 January 2020 in W.A. No. 3806 of 2019 and C.M.P. No. 24031 of 2019, the Madras High Court (Coram: A. P. Sahi, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.) returned findings adverse to the M. Kalifulla (Inspector of Police), and directed payment of compensation of Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).

Register number
TN 57 CW 0016
Case reference
W.A. No. 3806 of 2019 and C.M.P. No. 24031 of 2019
Court and date
Madras High Court (Coram: A. P. Sahi, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.), 21 January 2020
Officer(s) at the material time
M. Kalifulla (Inspector of Police)
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 30 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993
Finding of the Court (extract)
“So it is clear from the evidence of P.Ws 1 to 6 that the accused had committed an offence under Section 324 IPC r/w 30 of Human Rights Act.” (at para 6 (Sessions Court finding reproduced by Division Bench))
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 1 lakh (Rs 1,00,000).
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.

The Madras High Court judgment dated 21 January 2020 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
Custodial torturePrimary
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.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“So it is clear from the evidence of P.Ws 1 to 6 that the accused had committed an offence under Section 324 IPC r/w 30 of Human Rights Act.” (para 6 (Sessions Court finding reproduced by Division Bench))

Institutional response

1
21 Jan 2020

Order issued

Concluded
Madras High Court External · Binding

The Madras High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 100,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: W.A. No. 3806 of 2019 and C.M.P. No. 24031 of 2019
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

0
Not yet re-checked.

No published follow-up check has been recorded for this incident.

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.