AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Smart Summary

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

  1. Whether the State and its officers are liable for negligence resulting in the custodial death of Ramdayal.
  2. Whether departmental and criminal action should be taken against the officers responsible for the security lapse.
  3. Whether monetary compensation should be awarded to the family of the deceased.
  4. 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.

    Lawyers For Justice (Non-Government Organization) v. State Of M.P. And Others

    1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT

    INDORE

    DIVISION BENCH:

    [Hon'ble Shri P.K.Jaiswal&Hon'ble Shri D.K.Paliwal, JJ]

    W.P.No. 5895/2014 (PIL)

    Lawyers for Justice (Non Government Organization)

    Vs

    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

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Lawyers For Justice (Non-Government Organization) v. State Of M.P. And Others
    (Oct 1, 2015)