Punjab and Haryana HC orders Rs 5L interim relief for inmate’s death in custody

More than five years after an inmate’s unnatural death in custody, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has awarded Rs 5 lakh interim compensation to his mother.

The Bench observed the inmate’s strangulation in the Ludhiana Central Jail reflected the state’s failure to protect a prisoner’s life and its contention of non-involvement in the death would not absolve it of the liability to compensate the petitioner.

The ruling by Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj of the HC came on a petition filed against the State of Punjab and other respondents by Satwinder Kaur. She was seeking Rs 50-lakh compensation for her son Livtar Singh’s “murder” inside the jail premises.

Her counsel told the Bench that the jail authorities committed a 10-day delay in registering the FIR although it was incumbent upon them to act after the post-mortem report. The entire incident took place only due to the collusion of the jail authorities and their maladministration, connivance and ignorance, the counsel argued.

The state’s stand in the matter, on the other hand, was that there was no collusion, connivance and ignorance on the jail authorities’ part. An SIT constituted to probe the inmate’s death found three suspects, who subsequently confessed to the crime of strangulating him.

Taking up the matter, Justice Bhardwaj asserted Livtar Singh’s death due to “asphyxia because of strangulation” while lodged in the jail was undisputed. “Although the Punjab State Human Rights Commission, Chandigarh, has exonerated the police officials in the present case, a mere absence of any state involvement in the death does not absolve it of its obligation to protect the lives of the persons who are lodged in custody,” the court observed.

Before parting with the order, Justice Bhardwaj ordered the release of the amount in three months. “The petitioner may take recourse to alternative remedies to seek compensation in accordance with law, not only against the state but also under the Fatal Accidents Act,” the court added.