'Custodial Violence a Concern': Allahabad HC Denies Bail to Police Official

The court was hearing the bail plea of a cop, who is accused of picking up the victim from his home and killing him.

Denying bail to a police official in a custodial death case of a 24-year-old, the Allahabad High Court (HC) observed that "custodial violence, custodial torture and custodial deaths have always been a concern for civilised society," Live Law reported.

The High Court bench of Justice Samit Gopal said, "Time and again the judicial verdicts of the Apex Court and other Courts have shown their concern and anguish in such matters."

The bench categorically said that it was not only a case of police excess, but a clear case of abuse of power and high-handedness of the police.

The court was hearing the bail application of an Uttar Pradesh police official, who is accused of picking up the victim from his house and subsequently killing him after colluding with other police officers.

The officials are also accused of forcibly entering the victim's home and taking away Rs 60,000 after breaking the lock of a box.

A case was registered against the accused police official under Sections 302 (murder), 394 (voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery), 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrong­ful restraint), and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of the Indian Penal Code.

While the case was initially probed by the local police, the matter was transferred to the Central Bureau Investigation (CBI) after the high court's order.

The high court, taking into account the victim's extensive injuries and the opinion of the board of AIIMS, New Delhi, observed that he died because of the collective effect of the injuries he sustained.

The court said, "The present case is a case of custodial torture and death with robbery in a well planned conspiracy. The applicant is in the police force which is considered to be disciplined force and enshrined with the pious duty of maintaining law and order and protecting the citizens."

(With inputs from LiveLaw.)