CW-2024-0019Ranchi, JharkhandJudgment 18 November 2024

Ranchi Man vs State of Jharkhand

A Ranchi man, an undertrial prisoner remanded in judicial custody and admitted to RINPAS Ranchi for psychotic depression, escaped on 29 June 2012 when the two police constables deputed to guard him were absent from their posts, and was found dead later that day on a railway track. Overruling the Single Judge's dismissal, the Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that the deceased was in legal custody and that the State had failed in its constitutional duty to protect his life. The High Court directed the State of Jharkhand to pay Rs. 4,00,000 compensation to the deceased's widow under Article 226. 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 18 November 2024 in L.P.A. No. 187 of 2015, the Jharkhand High Court (Coram: M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Deepak Roshan, JJ.) returned findings adverse to 2 police personnel, namely: Constable, Custody guard, RINPAS Ranchi, Jharkhand Police; Constable, Custody guard, RINPAS Ranchi, Jharkhand Police, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 4 lakh (Rs 4,00,000).

Register number
JH 01 CW 0015
Case reference
L.P.A. No. 187 of 2015
Court and date
Jharkhand High Court (Coram: M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Deepak Roshan, JJ.), 18 November 2024
Officer(s) at the material time
Constable, Custody guard, RINPAS Ranchi, Jharkhand Police; Constable, Custody guard, RINPAS Ranchi, Jharkhand Police
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Article 21 of the Constitution of India; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Finding of the Court (extract)
“Thus, from the facts narrated herein above, it is crystal clear that due to the negligence of the two constables who were deputed for custody of the husband of the petitioner, who was suffering from "Psychotic Depression", the appellant's husband …” (at para 6)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 4 lakh (Rs 4,00,000).
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 Jharkhand High Court judgment dated 18 November 2024 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
Custodial deathPrimary
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.

“Thus, from the facts narrated herein above, it is crystal clear that due to the negligence of the two constables who were deputed for custody of the husband of the petitioner, who was suffering from "Psychotic Depression", the appellant's husband …” (para 6)

Institutional response

1
18 Nov 2024

Order issued

Concluded
Jharkhand High Court External · Binding

The Jharkhand High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 400,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: L.P.A. No. 187 of 2015
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(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.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.