- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Lawyers For Justice (Non-Government Organization) v. State Of M.P. And Others
Factual and Procedural Background
This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, Lawyers for Justice (Non Government Organization), against the State of Madhya Pradesh and others. The petition arose from the custodial death of Ramdayal, an undertrial prisoner detained in Sub-jail Kannod, Dewas District, who was murdered on 21/07/2014 while admitted for medical treatment at M.Y. Hospital, Indore. The petitioner sought directions for an inquiry to fix liability on officers responsible for neglecting official duties, compensation to the victim's family, and a report on actions taken by the State.
Ramdayal was facing trial for an offence under Section 302 IPC and was under judicial custody. He was admitted to the Central Jail hospital and later transferred to M.Y. Hospital for treatment. On the early morning of 21/07/2014, he was shot dead by an unknown assailant within the hospital premises while in state custody. The State officers allegedly failed to protect his life, prompting the petitioner to seek departmental and criminal action against responsible officials and monetary compensation for the victim's family.
The State responded by detailing disciplinary actions taken against jail warders on duty at the hospital, including suspension and withholding of increments. It was stated that the security of prisoners in the hospital is the responsibility of the jail administration, not the hospital's private security agency. Police personnel present at the hospital campus were not responsible for ward security but responded promptly after the incident. An inquiry officer was appointed to investigate irregularities, and compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- was paid to the victim's family. The State asserted that measures were being taken to prevent recurrence of such incidents.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the State and its officers are liable for negligence resulting in the custodial death of Ramdayal.
- Whether departmental and criminal action should be taken against the officers responsible for the security lapse.
- Whether monetary compensation should be awarded to the family of the deceased.
- Whether the State should submit a report on actions taken in response to the incident.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The State officers neglected their official duties to protect the fundamental rights and life of Ramdayal, who was in custody.
- An inquiry should be conducted to fix the liability of concerned officers.
- Appropriate departmental and criminal action must be taken against those responsible.
- Monetary compensation should be awarded to the victim’s family.
- The State should submit a report on the actions taken in response to the incident.
Respondent State’s Arguments
- Jail warder Yashpal Dabakwal, who was on duty during the incident, was suspended and departmental enquiry initiated.
- Show cause notices and chargesheets were issued to other jail warders on duty, with some punished by withholding increments.
- Other warders and officials were found not guilty after enquiry.
- The State has paid Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation to the victim’s family.
- An inquiry officer was appointed to investigate the incident and irregularities, with reports forwarded for further action.
- Measures are being taken to deploy guards efficient in drill and weapons to prevent future incidents.
- The security of prisoners in the hospital is the responsibility of the jail administration, not the hospital’s private security agency or police personnel.
Respondent M.Y. Hospital and Private Security Agency
- The hospital’s security is managed by a private security agency, which is not responsible for prisoner security.
- Jail guards are deputed by jail administration for prisoner security during hospital admission.
- The incident occurred due to negligence by jail guard Yashpal.
- Security guards were on duty on all floors of the hospital on the date of the incident.
Respondent Police
- Police personnel are stationed at a police post within the hospital campus but do not provide security inside hospital wards.
- Police responded immediately after the incident and registered a case under Sections 302/34 IPC.
- Security responsibility for the deceased lay with the jail administration as per the jail manual.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court examined the factual matrix and the procedural history as presented in the pleadings and replies. It noted that Ramdayal, an undertrial prisoner, was killed while in state custody at a hospital. The court observed that the State had initiated departmental action against the jail warders on duty, suspended the primary accused guard, and appointed an inquiry officer to investigate the incident and irregularities. Compensation was paid to the victim’s family, and steps were being taken to improve security measures for prisoners admitted to hospitals.
The court recognized the duty of the State to protect the fundamental rights and life of persons in its custody. The evidence of departmental proceedings and inquiry reports indicated that the State took the matter seriously and undertook remedial measures. The court’s analysis focused on the responsibility of the jail administration in ensuring prisoner security even when admitted to external hospitals, and the limited role of hospital security and police personnel in this context.
Holding and Implications
The court disposed of the petition after considering the facts, replies, and actions taken by the State.
The direct effect of the decision is that the State has been directed to continue its inquiry and take appropriate departmental and criminal action against responsible officers, and to provide compensation to the victim’s family. The court’s ruling underscores the State’s obligation to protect prisoners in custody, including when they are admitted to hospitals. No new legal precedent was established; rather, the decision reinforced existing principles regarding custodial responsibility and State liability.
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT
[Hon'ble Shri P.K.Jaiswal&Hon'ble Shri D.K.Paliwal, JJ]
Lawyers for Justice (Non Government Organization)
State of M.P. & ors.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri C.L.Yadav, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Shyam
Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Pushyamitra Bhargav, learned Dy. Advocate General for
the respondent/State.
Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel for the proposed
intervenor.
O R D E R
(Passed on 01/10/2015)
This Public Interest Litigation has been filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India claiming reliefs as under :-
“11.1 That, kindly be issued a writ, order or
direction to the respondent No.1 State to make an
enquiry for fixing liability of the concern officers,
who are responsible for neglect in official duties
and protect the fundamental rights of victim
Ramdayal and take appropriate departmental and
criminal action against the concern officers.
11.2 That, kindly be issue appropriate writ order
or direction to the respondents to pay monetary
compensation to the family of the victim
Ramdayal, who was murdered in state custody.
11.3 That, kindly be issued writ, order or
direction to the respondent No.1 state to submit a
report of action taken by state to this Hon'ble
Court.
11.4 That, any other relief which this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit to grant in the fact and
circumstances to the petitioner may also kindly be
granted.”
22. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that Ramdayal S/o
Sunder Lal, resident of Harda was facing trial for the offence
punishable under section 302 of the ipc in Sessions Trial No.
356/12 before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,
Kannod, Distt. Dewas and was detained as under trial prisoner
in Sub-jail Kannod, Distt. Dewas. He was referred for treatment
on 21/06/14 by the order of Additional Sessions Judge Kannod
and was admitted in hospital of Central Jail, Indore. On
16/07/14, under trial Ramdayal was sent to M. Y. Hospital,
Indore for treatment and admitted in Bed Number 12 Ward
Number 17 of M. Y. Hospital, Indore. On 21/07/14, at about 4-
30 a.m., Ramdayal was shot dead by some unknown person,
who came bearing Apron, in Bed Number 17 of Ward Number
17of M.Y. hospital. It is stated that under trial prisoner
murdered in the hospital while he was in custody of the State.
The officers of the State failed to protect the life of the under
trial prisoner. The State and its officers neglected to perform
their official duty to protect the fundamental right and life of a
citizen, therefore, it is necessary to fix the responsibility of the
State and its officers, who neglected to perform their official
duty to protect the fundamental right of the citizen and take
appropriate departmental and criminal action against those
officers. It is also necessary to provide monetary compensation
to the family of the victim Ram Dayal by the State.
3. In reply respondent No.1, stated that under trial Ram
Dayal was undergoing treatment in M.Y. Hospital on 21/07/14
jail warder Yashpal Dabakwal, was deputed in his security.
After the incident jail warder Yashpal Dabakwal,who was on
duty in M.Y. Hospital has already been suspended and
departmental enquiry has been initiated against him. Show
cause notice also given to jail warders Mahendra, Santosh
and Yashpal who were on duty in M.Y. Hospital on 21/07/14
and after their reply, charge-sheet has been issued against
3them. Warder Mahendra and Santosh have been punished
with withholding of one increment without cumulative effect
whereas jail warder Yashpal has been punished with
withholding of one increment with cumulative effect. It is further
stated that jail warders who were deputed on duty with other
prisoners in M.Y. Hospital were also served with the notices.
After reply to the notice, no action has been taken against jail
warders Deepak Tiwari, Muzib Khan, Irfan Khan, Vimal
Silawat, Meharban Singh and Rajendra Rathore as they were
not found guilty. It is further stated that show cause notice was
issued to Muzib Khan, incharge of warders and in pursuance
of the reply filed by Muzib Khan, another show cause notice
has been served upon Deputy Jail Superintendent Shri
S.B.Sharan and thereafter the enquiry was conducted and the
report has been forwarded to the Jail Head Quarters, Bhopal
for necessary action. It is further stated that State has very
seriously taken up the matter, so that such incidence do not
occur in future and in the present case family members of the
deceased Ramdayal have been given compensation of Rs.
2,00,000/-. It is further stated that on the basis of the
representation forwarded by the District & Sessions Judge,
Indore, respondent No.2 has been appointed as Enquiry
Officer to find out the irregularity and the enquiry of the
employees and after conducting detailed enquiry, order has
been issued on 25/05/15. It is further stated that respondents
have decided to deploy the guards, who are efficient in drill
and weapons. It is prayed that petition be dismissed.
4. Respondent Nos. 4 & 6 in their reply stated that M.Y.
Hospital is under the State Govt. The security of the Hospital is
being looked after by a private security agency M/s Bhupan
Intel Agency and an agreement was executed in between M.Y.
Hospital and M/s Bhupan Intel Agency on 01/08/09 which was
enforced on the alleged date of incident. It is further stated that
4whenever the prisoners are sent to M.Y. hospital for treatment
by the Central Jail/District Jail, Jail administration sent the
guard for security of the prisoners. On the alleged date of
incident also, jail guards were on duty. The security agency of
M.Y. hospital is not responsible for the security of the
prisoners. It is further stated that on the alleged date of
incident, jail guard Yashpal was on duty with the deceased
Ramdayal and due to his negligence, incident took place. It is
further stated that security guards are posted in ground floor,
first floor, ICU by the security agency and on the alleged date
of incident, security guards were on duty. It is prayed that
petition be dismissed.
5. Respondent No.2 in his reply has stated that police
Chauki of police station Sanyogitaganj has been set up in the
hospital campus and on the alleged date of incident Head
Constable Arun Kumar, No. 1615, Constable Devendra, No.
1436 and Constable Bane Singh, No. 2846 were present and
they reached the place of incident immediately after the
incident. The higher officers were also reached the place of the
incident. It is stated that responsibility of security of the
prisoners lies on jail department as per the provisions of jail
manual. Police personnel are not required to be on duty inside
of the ward of the hospital. The police personnel, who were on
duty at police post at M.Y. hospital campus look after the
persons injured in the road accident, poor injured persons and
persons who have been referred by the police for medical
examination and treatment. Police personnel of the police post
also engaged in patrolling to check criminal activities.
Responsibility of the security of the deceased Ram Dayal was
with jail administration. After the incident, police personnel
deputed to police post, reached the spot and crime No. 564/14
under section 302/34 of the ipc has been registered with
regard to murder of Ram Dayal and charge-sheet has also
5been filed. It is further stated that hospital administration has
also engaged a private security agency for the purpose of
security in the hospital campus. It is prayed that petition be
dismissed.
6. Respondent Nos. 3 & 5 in their reply have stated that
deceased Ram Dayal was detained in Sub-jail, Kannod. Ram
Dayal was referred for treatment to M.Y. Hospital, Indore and
he was admitted in jail hospital, Central Jail, Indore on
21/06/14. Ramdayal was sent through jail guard for further
treatment at M.Y. hospital, Indore on 16/07/14. Ram Dayal was
admitted in Ward Number 17 of M.Y. hospital. On 21/07/14, jail
guard Yashpal was on duty from 2-00 a.m. to 6-00 a.m. On
21/07/14 at about 4-30 a.m., some unknown persons shot
dead Ram Dayal. The report was lodged at P.S.
Sanyogitanganj. It is further stated that jail guard Yashpal has
been suspended for dereliction of duties and departmental
enquiry has been set up against him. Show cause notices
have also been given to duty incharge, Muzeeb Khan, jail
guard Deepak Tiwari and Irfan Khan, who were deputed for the
security of Ram Dayal. It is further stated that another under
trial prisoner Jitendra @ J.D. S/o Laxminarayan was also
admitted in ward No. 17 of MY hospital, Indore for treatment.
Jail guards Mahendra Chouhan, Santosh Sagne, Vimal
Silawat, Meharban Singh, Rajendra Rathore and Muzeeb
Khan were on security duty. Show cause notices have also
been issued to them and the enquiry is pending. It is prayed
that petition be dismissed.
7. We have heard the submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and closely scrutinized the original record produced
by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Indore. Ram Dayal S/o
Sunder Lal aged about 30 years, resident of Village Ajnar,
Police Station Handia, Distt. Harda was arrested in connection
Alert