Sarifuddin vs The State Of Assam And 17 Ors
- Court
- Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/31
GAHC010018012015
2026:GAU-AS:13808-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4329/2015
SARIFUDDIN
SO LT. AZIZUR RAHMAN, RO BOROITARI PART I, PO KALAIN, DIST
CACHAR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 17 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME
and POLITICAL DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY 6, DIST KAMRUP
2:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ASSAM POLICE HEAD QUARTERS
ULUBARI
GHY 7
DIST KAMRUP
ASSAM
3:DY. COMMISSIONER
CACHAR
ASSAM
4:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
CACHAR
ASSAM
5:OFFICER IN CHARGE
KATIGORAH POLICE
DIST CACHAR
6:Y. T. GYASTU
DIGP (MPC)
O/O -DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
Page No.# 2/31
ASSAM POLICE HEADQUARTERS
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007
DIST.- KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM.
7:AS PER HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DTD. 13.0.2024 IN IA(C) 2736/2023
THE RESPONDENT NO. 7 TO 16 ARE DELETED
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA, MR. S SARMA,MR. J H LASKAR,MD. S
ALOM,MR. I H LASKAR,MR. P K DEKA
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N J GOGOI R, R SAHIINII (R6),MR. D NATH (R6),GA,
ASSAM,MR. F U BORBHUIYA(R-9),MR. H R A CHOUDHURY(R-9),MR. J ISLAM(R-
7,11to14&16),MR. J M SULAIMAN(R-9),MR. K MUNIR(R-8),MR. M BORGOHAIN(R-10),MR. M
RAHMAN(R-10),MR. P K MUNIR(R-8),MR. R HUSSAIN(R-7,11to14&16),MR. S
BORGOHAIN(R-10),MR. T MOHAMMAD(R-7,11to14&16),MS. B DEVI(R-10),MR. A H M R
CHOUDHURY,MR. S P CHOUDHURY
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
For the petitioner : Mr. P.K. Deka.
For respondents : Mr. D. Nath, Senior Govt. Advocate.
: Mr. N. Kalita, Govt. Advocate.
Date on which judgment is reserved : 19.05.2026
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 17.09.2026
Whether the pronouncement is of
the operative part of the judgment? : No
Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced? : Yes
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
(CAV)
Page No.# 3/31
(K.R. Surana, J)
Heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also
heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Govt. Advocate, assisted by Mr. N. Kalita,
learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents.
2) The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that Azizur
Rahman, his father, was picked up by the police personnel, during the
intervening night between 06.07.2012 and 07.07.2012 and he was brought to
Kalain Patrol Post, where he questioned in connection with Katigorah P.S. Case
No. 279/2012, under Sections 147/148/149/353/336/323 of the IPC. It is
alleged that due to brutal custodial torture by police personnel of Kalain Patrol
Post under Katigorah Police Station, led by Sri Y.T. Gyatso (respondent no.6),
which led to the death of the father of the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ
petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking
direction for (a) an enquiry to be conducted by the Central Bureau of
Investigation or the National Investigation Agency and dispose of the
representation dated 12.12.2012; (b) to conduct departmental enquiry against
the police personnel who were involved in the incident for which the father of
the petitioner had died; (c) to submit death certificate and post mortem report
of the deceased father of the petitioner to the petitioner; and (d) to give
adequate compensation due to death of the father of the petitioner in police
custody.
Case of the petitioner:
3) In brief, the case of the petitioner is as follows:-
a. The petitioner’s father, namely, Azizur Rahman, a senior citizen aged
about 60 years was a locally respectable small scale businessman,
Page No.# 4/31
having no enmity with anyone. He was not a member of any
organization and also did not support any organization. He was a
family man living with petitioner, his wife, sons and his mother in his
own residential residence at Boroitoli Part-I, P.O. Kalain, Dist. Cachar.
b. On 04.07.2012, an organization had given a bundh call in protest of
second marriage of a Member of Assam Legislative Assembly of Barak
Valley. On the day of bundh, a group of political party supported the
people opposing the bundh. It was alleged that respondent nos. 7 and
9, were the two persons from the locality behind the scene.
Accordingly, group fighting erupted and the police started lathi charge.
When the situation worsened, the police arrested a number of persons
and started search operation to arrest the leaders in connection with
the incident.
c. It has been stated by the petitioner that because of political rivalry,
respondent no. 7, namely, Azizur Rahman Khan, had opposed the
bundh, but the police, in order to save the respondent no.7,
surrounded the house of the petitioner and at about 12:30 am on
07.07.2012, the police team headed by respondent no.6, knocked the
door of the house of the father of the petitioner and when his father
opened the door, the police started to mercilessly assault his father and
though the elderly father of the petitioner had pleaded before
respondent no.6 that he was innocent, the respondent no. 6 had
kicked his father on his ears and back of the head and then dragged
the father of the petitioner to police station at night. It has been stated
that the petitioner’s father was again tortured mercilessly in the police
station, where he died on the same night. The petitioner had stated
Page No.# 5/31
that on coming to know about the barbaric action of the police, on
08.07.2012, the mother of the petitioner had lodged an FIR before the
Officer-in-Charge of Katigorah P.S., requesting to take action against
the persons involved in the death of her husband. The said FIR was
registered as Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291 dated 08.07.2012, under
Sections 448/325/506/354/302 of the IPC.
d. The petitioner has stated that even after filing of the FIR, no enquiry
or investigation was carried out and except certificate in Form-A, the
petitioner was not provided with copy of the post mortem report.
Thereafter, Magisterial Enquiry was conducted by the Addl. District
Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar. After the conclusion of enquiry, a report
under Memo No. 118/Enquiry/2012/4 dated 20.07.2012, was submitted
before the District Magistrate, Cachar, which according to the
petitioner, did not contain any definite conclusion and was made
subject to final report to be submitted by the Forensic Science
Laboratory, Guwahati. The petitioner has stated that no member of the
family of the deceased was heard during Magisterial Enquiry and that
the respondent no. 6 was also not questioned. It has been stated that
though it is recorded in the Magisterial Enquiry Report that the father
of the petitioner was forcefully taken away by the police as a part of
political conspiracy and he died in police custody, but no enquiry was
made as to who were behind the incident and why the father of the
petitioner was brought to the police station. It is also stated that even
the petitioner’s family was not aware of the Magisterial Enquiry.
e. It has been stated that due to undue influence by respondent nos. 6
to 9, neither proper enquiry was conducted nor any departmental
Page No.# 6/31
action was initiated against the police officials involved in the incident.
f. Accordingly, the petitioner had submitted representation dated
12.12.2012 before the Commissioner and Secretary, Home and Political
Department, Govt. of Assam, alleging the involvement of respondent
nos. 7 to 16 and requested to conduct an enquiry either by the Central
Bureau of Investigation (CBI for short) or the National Investigation
Agency (NIA for short) and to give justice.
g. It has been stated that the petitioner has not received any
compensation till date from the Govt. of Assam due to death of Azizur
Rahman in police custody nor they were provided with his death
certificate.
h. Accordingly, it has been prayed that this Court would issue a direction
to conduct an enquiry of the death of the father of the petitioner by
CBI or NIA and dispose of the representation dated 12.12.2012; to
direct departmental enquiry against the police personnel who were
involved in the incident for which the father of the petitioner had died;
to submit death certificate and post mortem report of petitioner’s
deceased father to the petitioner; and to give adequate compensation
to the petitioner due to death of his father in police custody.
4) It would be relevant to briefly refer to the stand taken by the
parties in their respective affidavits:-
a. Affidavit-in-opposition by respondent no. 9 on 16.11.2015:
Briefly, it may be stated that in his affidavit-in-opposition Ataur
Rahman Mazarbhuiya, who was the then M.L.A. of Katigorah LAC, who
was arrayed as respondent no.9, had denied that he was connected or
Page No.# 7/31
involved either in calling for or opposing the bundh. Being a
representative of the people, he was informed by the local people over
telephone regarding group-fight between the supporters and opposers
bundh and on getting information, he had informed the Civil and Police
administration to contain the situation and appealed to the people to
maintain peace and tranquility in the locality. He came to know about
the death of the father of the petitioner in police custody and went to
the house of the petitioner to express his sympathy and condolence to
the family members and assured them to take up the matter with the
higher authorities to enquire into the matter and to take action against
those found involved in alleged custodial death of the victim. The
respondent no. 9 denied his involvement in conspiracy.
b. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent no. 4 on 20.11.2015:
Briefly, it may be stated that Sri Rofreez, the then Superintendent of
Police, Cachar, in his affidavit-in-opposition, had stated that on
04.07.2012, a group clash erupted between two communities at Kalain
Bazar under Katigorah P.S., Dist. Cachar, over 12 (twelve) hours bundh
call given by the Hindu Jagaran Manch throughout the district on the
reported bigamy by Dr. Rumi Nath, MLA of Borkhola LAC and her
reported conversion to Islam. It was stated that due to group clash,
several persons from both sides including police personnel on duty
sustained injuries and a number of cases were registered at Katigorah
P.S. in connection with the said incident and curfew had to be clamped
in the area to bring the situation under control. In connection with the
investigation of the investigation of the said case, two accused were
apprehended by the police and during the course of interrogation, the
Page No.# 8/31
name of Azizur Rahman was disclosed as an active member of the mob
that had went berserk at the time of the incident. It was stated that
independent witnesses also pointed towards Azizur Rahman as a part
of the mob. In the interest of investigation, the police team turned up
to the house of Azizur Rahman and he was found there, but his son
was not available. At around 01:30 hours, Azizur Rahman was brought
to Kalyan Patrol Post, which is about 500 meters away from his house
and he was made to sit on a chair, but immediately after sitting on the
chair, Azizur Rahman complained of uneasiness and suddenly dropped
down and became unconscious. He was immediately shifted to Kalain
F.R.U. with proper requisition and escort in a government vehicle. The
Medical Officer, Kalain F.R.U., after examining the patient, referred him
to Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar. Accordingly, the patient
was shifted to Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar but the
doctor declared him brought dead. Thus, unnatural death case vide
Katigorah P.S. U.D. Case No. 15/2012 was registered and investigation
was taken up. The inquest over the dead body was conducted by an
Executive Magistrate. The postmortem examination was conducted at
Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar, which was video-graphed
and thereafter the dead body was handed over to the family members
of the deceased. The said respondent had admitted lodging of the FIR
by Musstt. Saleha Khatun, wife of Late Azizur Rahman at Katigorah
P.S., which was registered as Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012, under
Sections 448/325/506/354/302/34 IPC, wherein it was stated that the
respondent no.6 along with his staff conducted raid in her house at
about 12:30 AM and forcibly picked-up her husband and brought to
Page No.# 9/31
Kalain Patrol Post. She was informed by her neighbors that her
husband suddenly because ill at Kalain Patrol Post and shifted to
Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar, where he died. As per the
FIR, the informant had suspected that the death of her husband
occurred due to custodial torture. It was stated that in the postmortem
report, there was a finding that no external injury was detected on the
dead body. Thereafter, on receipt of FSL Report, the Associate Medical
Professor, Department of Forensic Science, Silchar Medical College and
Hospital, Silchar, furnished final opinion that the cause of death was
syncope following acute or chronic coronary insufficiency. It was also
stated that the present I.O. re-visited the place of occurrence and
examined some more witnesses and recorded their statement under
Section 161 CrPC, but no new facts were unfolded, and the re-
investigation is pending for examination of more witnesses.
It may be mentioned that in this case, the petitioner has referred to
the complaint of Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012, as the wife of Md.
Azizur Rahman instead of referring to her as his mother.
c. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent no. 10 on 23.11.2015:
Briefly, it may be stated that Dr. Mainul Islam Barbhuiya, the
respondent no.10, in his affidavit-in- opposition, had stated that he is
working as a Senior Medical and Health Officer under the Health and
Family Welfare (A) Department, Assam. At the relevant time, he was
on deputation at Kalain F.R.U. and on the date of alleged incident, he
was not on duty at Kalain F.R.U. and hence, he was not at all privy or
witness to the alleged incident. In that regard, he had referred to the
enquiry report, where it was stated as follows:-
Page No.# 10/31
The attending doctor Suman Bhowmik, M&HO-I, FRU Kalain stated in her
statement [vide Annexure-Y] on 19/7/12 that in the intervening night of
6/7/12 and 07/7/12 he had been on duty. Further the Doctor stated at
around 1.50 a.m. on 07/7/12 DSP HQ and others had brought one patient
Azizur Rahman to the FRU. On clinical test, he found the patient in the
gasping state and pulse rate feeble B.P. was not found recordable. Thus,
dexona was injected by a nurse as per Doctor’s advice and referred the
patient to SMCH. The doctor further stated that no [external] abnormally was
found.
Accordingly, the respondent no.10 had denied his involvement in any
conspiracy for death of father of the petitioner with other respondents
as false and devoid of any merit.
d. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent nos.7, 11 to 14 and 16
on 01.12.2015:
Briefly it may be stated that Azizur Rahman Khan, the respondent no.7,
in the joint affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent nos. 7, 11 to
14 and 16, had stated that he is a senior citizen aged 70 years and is
involved in various social activities in the locality. It was stated that he
and other private respondents had neither supported nor opposed the
bundh call as the answering respondents belong to Katigorah
constituency and the concerned MLA is of another constituency, i.e.
Borkhola Constituency. It was stated that they were shocked to know
that an innocent person was arrested by the police, who had died due
to police torture. It was stated that the deceased was not a member of
any political party and therefore, the question of any political rivalry
with the deceased does not arise at all. It was denied that the
deponent was one of the persons who opposed the bundh because of
political rivalry and the police, to save the deponent had arrested the
Page No.# 11/31
deceased. It was denied that the answering respondents were involved
in the incident. It was stated that in the representation dated 12.12.12,
filed 5 (five) months’ later, the deponent and other respondents were
implicated falsely at the instance of their village rivals. It was stated
that they had no rivalry with the deceased, who was not known to
them, and he was a resident of village far away from the residence of
the deponent and other private respondents. They had denied any
conspiracy in the death of the father of the writ petitioner.
e. Affidavit-in-reply by the petitioner on 21.08.2017 against the
affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent nos. 7, 11 to 14 and 16:
Briefly, it may be stated that the petitioner, in his affidavit-in- reply, had
denied that respondent no.7 was not involved in the said incident. It
was stated that the Kalain Patrol Post is located in the land of the
respondent no.7. Hence, it was stated that there was strong prima
facie evidence against the respondent no.7 and that the police, in
order to save the respondent no.7, had taken the father of the
petitioner into custody.
f. Affidavit-in-reply by the petitioner on 14.09.2017 against the
affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.4:
Briefly, it may be stated that the petitioner, in his affidavit-in- reply, had
stated that the police went to the residence of deceased Azizur
Rahman to avoid arresting Azizur Rahman Khan (respondent no.7) and
thereafter, tortured him as a result of which he died in police custody.
It was stated that the police as well as the Medical Officer of Kalain
FRU failed to provide minimum required facility to the father of the
petitioner. It was stated that while shifting his father from Kalain FRU
Page No.# 12/31
to Silchar Medical College and Hospital, no ambulance with oxygen was
provided to him, but he was brought on a police vehicle. It was stated
that as a part of conspiracy, his father was deprived of minimum
necessary treatment at Kalain FRU to save his life. It was stated that
nothing was done for investigation after registering Katigorah P.S. Case
No. 291/12 by his mother. It was reiterated that his father had died
due to police torture.
g. Affidavit-in-reply by the petitioner on 14.09.2017 against the
affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent no.10:
Briefly, it may be stated that the petitioner, in his affidavit-in-reply, had
stated that no proper medicine was proved to his father on the night
he was brought to Kalain FRU and no steps was taken to provide him
with oxygen and ambulance to refer him to Silchar Medical College and
Hospital, Silchar and the police personnel had forcefully taken his
father in their police vehicle as dead person.
h. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent no. 8 on 18.09.2017:
Briefly it may be stated that Anwar Hussain Choudhury, respondent no.
8,in his affidavit-in-opposition, had stated that there was a bundh call
on 04.07.2012 by an organization whereas another political group
opposed the same, but it is not within his knowledge if the respondent
nos. 7 and 9 were behind the scene or not. He had stated that the
police personnel were also attacked by the mob and to that extent
Katigorah Police Station Case No. 279/2012 under Sections
147/148/149/353/336/323 IPC was registered. He was not aware
whether respondent no. 7 had opposed the bundh call or not. He had
admitted that respondent no. 6 had brought the father of the petitioner
Page No.# 13/31
to the police station on 07.07.2012 and later, he came to know that the
father of the petitioner expired at Silchar Medical College being
referred from Kalain Hospital. He had stated that in the post mortem
report, no injury was found on the dead body and after examination of
the viscera by Forensic Science, Kahilipara, Guwahati, it was opined
that death of Azizur Rahman was due to syncope following acute or
chronic coronary insufficiency. He had denied that he had given
protection to respondent no. 7 or ever favoured respondent no.6 or
that he was ever a tenant of respondent no.6 and stated that he was a
tenant of Dr. Moinul Islam as quarters were not available. He had
denied that he went to the residence of the petitioner as he was not
present at Kalain Police Patrol and at the relevant time he had gone to
Kalain Tea Estate in connection with Katigorah P.S. Case No. 279/2012
along with ASI R.U. Laskar, Havildar Amiya Paul and one section of 15
I.R. Battalion. It was stated that the enquiry was conducted by an
Executive Magistrate (Addl. District Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar) as per
Section 176(5) of CrPC and it was stated that Section 176(4) CrPC
would not be applicable.
i. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent no. 17 on 02.03.2021:
Briefly, it may be stated that Sri Partha Sarathi Paul, respondent no.17,
had stated in his affidavit-in-opposition that while he was posted as
Kalain FRU Hospital, Cachar, as Deputy Superintendent, he received a
telephonic call from local MLA on 07.07.2012 at about 01:30 AM and
informed about the incident and accordingly, he rushed to Kalain FRU
Hospital immediately and on reaching there he found that the father of
the petitioner had already been shifted to Silchar Medical College &
Page No.# 14/31
Hospital. He had enquired about the matter and also verified the M.L.
Register (Official Emergency Patient Register) wherein it was noticed
that there was deletion/ erasing in page no. 194, in between serial
number 895-896. Having noticed the same, he had taken the initial
signature of the attending doctor Sri S. Bhowmik by the side of the
deletion/ erasing part and he took the said M.L. Register in his custody
by providing a fresh register to the Emergency Department. On
06.12.2012, at the request of Dr. S. Bhowmik, he handed over the said
M.L. Register to him for producing before the Court after keeping a
photocopy of the concerned page, i.e. page no. 194 of M.L. Register,
and he took acknowledgement receipt from Sri Bhowmik. He had
stated that since then the M.L. Register was not returned by Dr. S.
Bhowmik, he had informed the same to the Joint Director of Health
Services, Cachar, Silchar, vide letter dated 07.10.2013, who in turn
requested Dr. Suman Bhowmik to return the M.L. Register to him. He
then retired on 31.05.2014.
j. Affidavit by respondent no. 1 on 29.03.2022 in compliance of the
orders dated 25.01.2021 and 24.03.2021:
Briefly, it may be stated that pursuant to the orders dated 25.01.2021
and 24.03.2021, Sri Animesh Talukdar, serving as joint Secretary to the
Government of Assam, Home and Political Department had filed his
affidavit. In the said affidavit he had stated that respondent no. 6 was
then serving as Addl. Superintendent of Police, Dima Hasao District. He
had referred to the sequence of events leading to the contents of the
FIR lodged by Saleha Khatun, registered as Katigorah P.S. Case No.
291/12, apprehending of Azizur Rahman, his death on way to Silchar
Page No.# 15/31
Medical College & Hospital and about subsequent registration of
Katigorah P.S. Case vide U.D. Case No. 15/2012. By referring to the
contents of the provisional postmortem report dated 07.07.2012;
Forensic Science Laboratory Report dated 12.09.2012 and Final
Postmortem Report dated 12.10.2012, it was mentioned that there was
no external injury on the dead body and that death occurred due to
syncope following acute or chronic coronary insufficiency. It was stated
that the I.O. had examined Dr. Suman Bhowmik, M&HO, Kalain FRU
and recorded his statement under Section 161 CrPC and in his
statement, the said doctor had stated that on 07.07.2012, at about
1.30 AM, Azizur Rahman was brought to Kalain FRU in serious
condition. His blood pressure and pulse was low and on examining
him, gave him an injection. Suddenly, he had heart attack and hence,
he was referred to Silchar Medical College Hospital. He did not find any
torture mark in Azizur Rahman’s body and that the doctor had clearly
mentioned that due to sudden heart failure, his health condition had
deteriorated. It was stated that vide notification dated 17.03.2020 and
notification dated 20.05.2021, the service of Sri Y.T. Gyatso, IPS, then
serving as Superintendent of Police (Law), Directorate of Vigilance and
Anti-Corruption, Assam, Guwahati, was placed for inter-cadre
deputation from Assam Meghalaya Joint Cadre to Sikkim Centre and he
was released by the State Government.
k. Addl. affidavit filed by the petitioner on 10.05.2023:
Briefly, it may be stated that the petitioner, by filing his additional
affidavit, had stated as under:-
(a) His father, aged 60 years, was picked up, forcibly taken to Kalain
Page No.# 16/31
Patrol Post only to get the custody of his son, Nizamuddin, and
mercilessly beaten up because of which he had died
instantaneously and thus, it was a clear case of custodial death.
(b) It was stated that during Magisterial Inquiry, an eye-witness had
stated that “one police, having Mongolian look came around the
table and twisted the head of Azizur Rahman. In the act other two
police keep Azizur Rahman immobile by catching hold of his two
hands. This forceful twisting of head resulted complete collapse of
Azizur Rahman as he was seen leaned by a side, stated by
aforesaid three persons. They further stated, having seen Azizur
Rahman leaned by his side- the police carried him to a vehicle
nearby and sped away.”It was stated that two other witnesses also
deposed the same corroborating the facts leading to the death of
the victim.
(c) Accordingly, it was stated that Sri Y.T. Gyatsu had killed the
victim in police station and thus, it was a clear case of culpable
homicide amounting to murder during police custody. It was also
stated that after the death of the victim in police station, the
victim was rushed to Kalain FRU (Hospital), where respondent
no.18 was on duty, who after preliminary investigation came to a
conclusion that the victim was brought dead, but due to political
and other pressure, he had to strike out the original entry in M.L.
Register and referred the patient to Silchar Medical College and
Hospital, pretending as if the victim was still alive in order to make
it a case of natural death. The victim was not sent to Silchar
Medical College and Hospital in police vehicle and not by hospital
Page No.# 17/31
ambulance and without giving him oxygen facilities though at that
point ambulance service was available in the said hospital.
(d) It was stated that the respondent no.6 had killed the victim by
cracking the neck of the victim, but no X-Ray of the deceased was
done though the wife of the victim had filed a petition for an
enquiry under Section 176(1-A) of the CrPC, besides praying for
conducting X-Ray of the neck of the deceased. It was stated that
in paragraph 11 of the Inquiry Report, it was recorded that the
arresting police had picked up the victim without following due
procedure of the provisions of Section 50 and 50-A of the CrPC.
(e) It was also stated that during inquiry, three eyewitnesses,
namely, Mahibur Rehman, Tazuddin Borbhuiya and Sahid Uddin
had deposed and as per their version, they saw that the police
made Azizur sit on a red plastic chair and started arguing with him
and suddenly two police officers held the leg of Azizur and one
tribal police officer held the head and face of Azizur and gave a
jerk and then Azizur fell towards right and after 4-5 minutes,
police took Azizur by a vehicle.
(f) It was stated to the effect that in paragraph 8(vii) of the Inquiry
Report, it is recorded that respondent no.18, who had examined
the victim was totally silent about the deletion of entry in page no.
194 in between serial number 895 and 896, whereas both the
entries were made by him after examining two patients at that
point of time. In his statement, he had stated that during his duty
period on 06.07.2012, at 11.50 AM, he had examined one Kartik
Ree as a patient whose entry no. was 895 and entry no. 896 was
Page No.# 18/31
also made by him on 07.07.2012 at 00.50 am, and he has not
taken any steps to find out who deleted a portion of the entry
made above entry no. 896.
(g) Accordingly, by referring to political pressure by respondent no. 9
and alleged violation of human rights by respondent no. 6and
alleged destroying of evidence by respondent no. 18, was stated
that it was a case of murder of Azizur Rahman by respondent no.
6 and thus, the State was vicariously liable to pay compensation
on account of custodial death. It was also stated that the
investigation of FIR lodged by wife of the victim, Katigorah P.S.
Case No. 291/2012, was hurriedly investigated and closed by
submission of Final Report no. 144 dated 29.12.2012, which was
rejected by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Silchar by order
dated 12.07.2013 and directed the Officer-In-Charge, Katigorah
P.S. to re-investigate the case, but no headway has been made in
the matter and therefore, independent inquiry by CBI or NIA be
ordered to investigate the case.
(h) It was stated that the projected cause of death of the victim is
syncope, and this may happen to any aged person, who was in
deep sleep when he was suddenly woken-up and taken to police
station alone and interrogated and tortured and surrounded by
police and in such cases, medical jurisprudence states that under
any abnormal situation, a person may collapse due to excessive
pulse beat/ heart beat/ high blood pressure and all these might
have occurred to the victim, who was picked up in a cruel manner.
(i) It was stated that the family has suffered due to sudden death
Page No.# 19/31
of petitioner’s father, the entire family has suffered mental shock
and have suffered irreparable loss and injury and accordingly,
considering the same compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees
Fifty lakh only) be awarded to the family members of Late Azizur
Rahman, and strict action be taken against the accused persons,
more particularly, respondent no. 6 and 18.
l. Affidavit filed by the respondent no.5 on 08.09.2023 in
compliance of the order dated 11.08.2023:
Briefly, it may be stated that respondent no. 5, by filing his affidavit,
has brought on record the F.R. submitted in Katigorah P.S. Case No.
291/2012 under Sections 448/325/506/354/302 IPC, vide FR No.
144/12 dated 29.12.2012, which was not accepted. On re-investigation
of the case, no material was found to implicate anyone and the
Investigating Officer had submitted a FR No. 32/2023 on 30.04.2023.
m. Affidavit filed by the respondent no.2 on 11.01.2024 pursuant to
order dated 14.09.2023, passed in I.A.(C) No. 2736/2023:
Briefly, it may be stated that Sri Nitul Gogoi, the Inspector General of
Police (Admn.), by way of his affidavit filed pursuant to order of the
Court dated 14.09.2023, passed in I.A.(C) No. 2736/2023, had stated
that the respondent no.6 was on Inter-State deputation to Sikkim and
his address was disclosed therein.
n. Addl. affidavit filed by the petitioner on 29.05.2025:
Briefly, it may be stated that the petitioner, by filing his additional
affidavit, had re-stated the statements already referred previously,
relating to his version of how his father had died; about lodging of the
FIR; submission of Final Report dated 29.12.2012; order dated
Page No.# 20/31
12.07.2013, directing re-investigation; re-investigation; and Final
Report submitted on 30.04.2023. In the said context, it has been
submitted that Saleha Khatun, the informant had filed her objection
petition no. 663/25 dated 23.04.2025, against the Final Report and the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, vide order dated 23.04.2025,
declined to accept the Final Report and directed registration of
Complaint Case and the matter was fixed on 03.05.2025 and
thereafter, fixed on 10.07.2025. Accordingly, by alleging custodial
torture and resultant death of the father of the petitioner, a claim for
monetary compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty lakh only) was
claimed and prayer was also made for strict action against respondent
no.6.
o. Addl. Affidavit filed by the petitioner on 04.06.2025:
Briefly, it may be stated that by filing yet another affidavit, the
petitioner had stated that due to unnatural death, his father could not
perform Haj despite applying for the same a few weeks before his
death. It was also stated that notification dated 27.12.2024, envisaged
compensation for death of convicted or under trial prisoners. It was
stated that the notification was not attracted in this case and in the
said context, the petitioner had reiterated his version of the death of
his father and as such, deterrent compensation was required to be
paid to the petitioner.
p. Affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.6 on
09.01.2026:
Briefly, it may be stated that the respondent no.6, in his affidavit- in-
opposition, had stated as follows:-
Page No.# 21/31
(a) That as detailed by the then Superintendent of Police, Cachar,
he reached Kalain Police Patrol Post a little before midnight
(06.07.12- 07.07.2012). He had stated that in connection with the
ongoing incidents of group clashes a number of cases were
registered at Katigorah P.S. During investigation of Katigorah P.S.
Case No. 279/2012 under sections 147/148/149/353/336/326 IPC;
Katigorah P.S. Case No. 284/2012 under sections
147/148/149/326/379 IPC; and Katigorah P.S. Case No. 288/2012
under sections 147/148/149/336/427 IPC, the name of Azizur
Rahman (father of the petitioner) was disclosed as an active
member of the unruly mob as well as one of the instigators and
moreover, the petitioner was also one of the FIR named accused
in Katigorah P.S. Case No. 288/2012.
(b) As per instructions from the Superintendent of Police, Cachar, a
team of police team including women police under his leadership
raided the house of Azizur Rahman and he was available, but Md.
Nazimuddin (accused in Katigorah P.S. Case No. 288/2012 was not
found available. A little after 1.00 AM, he had brought Md. Azizur
Rahman to Kalain Patrol Post which was situated at a distance of
around 500 meters from his house for examining him in
connection with the hereinbefore mentioned cases and he was
made to sit on a chair. Thereafter, the deponent went out of the
police station for further patrolling.
(c) After a while when he returned to Patrol Post, he found Md.
Azizur Rahman in an unconscious state, as such the matter was
immediately brought to the notice of the then Deputy
Page No.# 22/31
Superintendent of Police, (HQS), Silchar, who was in an adjoining
room following his duty shift and the accused was immediately
shifted to Kalain F.R.U.
(d) It was learnt that while sitting on the chair, the accused person
mentioned uneasiness and then dropped down and became
unconscious. At the Kalain F.R.U., the Medical Officer on duty, after
examining the patient, referred him to Silchar Medical College &
Hospital, Silchar and accordingly, the accused person was shifted
to Silchar Medical College & Hospital, Silchar. Subsequently, it was
learnt that the attending doctor at Silchar Medical College &
Hospital, Silchar, after examining the accused person had declared
him brought dead. In that regard an UD Case was registered at
Katigorah P.S. vide UD Case No. 15/2012, and investigation was
taken-up. He later on came to learn that a case was registered
against him and the concerned Police Party on 08.07.2012, being
Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012, under Sections
448/325/354/302/34 IPC.
(e) He had deposed in connection with a Magisterial Inquiry by the
then Additional District Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar, into the
incident of custodial death of Md. Azizur Rahman, in connection
with Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/12. It was stated that as a
probationer, he had his lodging at Police Guest House, Silchar,
Cachar and thus, it was denied as false and baseless that he had
taken house property on rent.
q. Affidavit-in-reply by petitioner on 03.02.2026, against the
affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 6:
Page No.# 23/31
Briefly, it may be stated that the petitioner, in his affidavit-in- reply
against the affidavit-in- opposition filed by respondent no.6, had
denied that Late Azizur Rahman was not the FIR-named accused and
he had no criminal antecedents. It would suffice to mention that while
denying the statements made by the respondent no.6, the stand
already taken earlier were reiterated. The petitioner has cited the case
of D.K Basu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610, and it was
reiterated that the respondent no. 6 is liable to be punished for offence
committed under Section 302/299 IPC and he was also liable to face
disciplinary proceeding.
Submissions by both sides: -
5) In course of hearing, while the learned counsel for the
petitioner had made his submissions projecting custodial death of Md. Azizur
Rahman and prayed to award the petitioner with compensation as prayed for.
He has also submitted a written argument on 20.07.2026, which is made a part
of the record. The said written argument, is accompanied by the print-out of the
following cases, viz., (i) D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610, (ii)
Rohtash Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors., AIR 2014 SC (Supp) 182, (iii) In Re:
Suo Motu Custodial Violence and other matters relating to Prison Condition,
2023 (5) GLT 19, (iv) Konto Warisa & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., 2022 (3) GLT
187.
6) Per contra, the learned Senior Govt. Advocate had made his
submissions to project that the case of the petitioner was something else when
the case was registered and subsequently, by passage of time, the projection of
the case of the petitioner has shown conspicuous change. Accordingly, it was
submitted that the case was liable to be dismissed by exonerating the State
Page No.# 24/31
respondents, jointly and severally.
Reasons, decision and order: -
7) Considered the submissions made at the Bar. Also considered
the cases accompanying the written argument filed by the learned counsel for
the petitioner. Also perused the scanned copy of the Case Diary of Katigorah P.S.
Case No. 291/2012, which was ordered to be converted to G.R. Case No.
2363/2012.
8) At the outset, the undeniable fact is that Md. Azizur Rahman
(also called Azizur Rahman) was picked up by the police personnel led by
respondent no. 6 after midnight of the intervening dates of 06.07.2012 and
07.07.2012 and brought to the Kalain Patrol Post. That sometime after being
arrested, brought and detained in the Kalain Patrol Post, Md. Azizur Rahman
collapsed and was brought to Kalain F.R.U., from where he was referred to
Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar. On being brought to Silchar
Medical College and Hospital, Silchar, he was declared, brought dead.
9) In the FIR filed by Musstt. Saleha Khatun, wife of Late Azizur
Rahman at Katigorah P.S., which was registered as Katigorah P.S. Case No.
291/2012, under Sections 448/325/506/354/ 302/34 IPC, it was stated that the
respondent no.6 along with his staff conducted raid in her house at about 12:30
AM and forcibly picked-up her husband and brought to Kalain Patrol Post and
she was informed by her neighbours that her husband suddenly became ill at
Kalain Patrol Post and shifted to Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar,
where he died. As per the FIR, the informant had suspected that the death of
her husband occurred due to custodial torture. In this writ petition, the
petitioner has also taken a stand that his father, Md. Azizur Rahman, died due to
Page No.# 25/31
custodial torture at Kalain Patrol Post. Later, by filing additional affidavit, the
petitioner took a stand that three eyewitnesses had informed him that on the
fateful day, his father was made to sit on a chair in the Kalain Patrol Post and
while two police personnel held his legs and the respondent no.6 held his face
and twisted the neck of Md. Azizur Rahman, after which he had collapsed.
However, as per the postmortem report, no external injury was detected on the
dead body. Thereafter, on receipt of FSL Report, the Associate Medical Professor,
Department of Forensic Science, Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar,
furnished final opinion that the cause of death was syncope following acute or
chronic coronary insufficiency.
10) Considering the aforesaid facts, the respondents, in their
respective affidavit-in- opposition, have not specifically denied the following: -
a. The arrest was not made on the strength of any warrant of
arrest.
b. Before arrest, Md. Azizur Rahman was not given notice under
Section 41A of the CrPC.
c. After arrest, there was no compliance with the provisions of
Section 41B(b) and 41B(c) of the CrPC.
d. After arrest there was no compliance with the provisions of
Section 50 of the CrPC.
e. After arrest there was no compliance with the provisions of
Section 50A of the CrPC.
f. That while shifting Md. Azizur Rahman, who was in collapsed
condition, from Kalain F.R.U.to Silchar Medical College and Hospital,
Silchar, which is at a distance of 28-30 kms., he was not taken in
ambulance available at the Kalain F.R.U., but the police brought him to
Page No.# 26/31
Silchar Medical College and Hospital in police vehicle.
g. While shifting Md. Azizur Rahman from Kalain F.R.U. to Silchar
Medical College and Hospital, Silchar, the police personnel did not
inform the family members of the same and did not carry the family
member of Md. Azizur Rahman in the same vehicle.
11) Thus, the arrest of Md. Azizur Rahman, since deceased, was
illegal, being not in compliance with the statutory and legal requirement of
complying with the provisions of Sections 41B, Section 41C, 50 and 50A of the
CrPC.
12) Though the respondent authorities had asserted in their
affidavit-in-opposition that the house of the petitioner and the deceased,
namely, Md. Azizur Rahman was 500 meters away from Kalain Patrol Post, yet
there is no record of any attempt being made by the police personnel to inform
any family member of Md. Azizur Rahman about his deteriorating health
condition or took any family member or people from the neighbourhood to
accompany the police team to Kalain F.R.U. and thereafter to Silchar Medical
College and Hospital, Silchar.
13) Thus, prima facie, the death of Md. Azizur Rahman had occurred
during illegal police custody and therefore, the petitioner along with the other
family members of Md. Azizur Rahman are found entitled to monetary
compensation, which would be referred to later.
14) In the meantime, a Magisterial Inquiry was ordered and after
inquiry, the Additional District Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar, had submitted an
Inquiry Report dated 30.03.3013, and in this writ petition, the petitioner has
expressed his dissatisfaction with the said Magisterial Inquiry Report dated
Page No.# 27/31
30.03.2013.
15) The petitioner has alleged that his father, Md. Azizur Rahman
was brought dead by the police at Kalain F.R.U., but the attending doctor first
recorded in the Medico-Legal Register (M.L. Register for short) that his father
was brought dead and thereafter, illegally deleted the original entry and made a
false entry in the said to the effect that his pulse was low and that he was
shown to be referred to Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar, to make it
appear that Md. Azizur Rahman was alive when he left Kalain F.R.U., which was
to give benefit to the police personnel.
16) The fact remains that the respondent no.17, had stated in his
affidavit-in-opposition that while he was posted at Kalain F.R.U. Hospital, Cachar,
as Deputy Superintendent, he received a telephonic call from local MLA on
07.07.2012 at about 01:30 AM and informed about the incident and accordingly,
he rushed to Kalain FRU Hospital immediately and on reaching there he found
that the father of the petitioner had already been shifted to Silchar Medical
College & Hospital. He had enquired about the matter and verified the M.L.
Register (Official Emergency Patient Register),and he noticed that there was
deletion/ erasing in page no. 194, in between serial number 895-896 and took
the short signature of the attending doctor by the side of the deletion/ erasing
part and he took the said M.L. Register in his custody by providing a fresh
register to the Emergency Department. On 06.12.2012, on request of the said
doctor, he handed over the said M.L. Register to him for producing before the
Court after keeping a photocopy of the relevant page no. 194 of the M.L.
Register, where he took acknowledgement receipt from the said doctor. He had
stated that since then the M.L. Register has not been returned by the doctor
concerned. Accordingly, he had informed the same to the Joint Director of
Page No.# 28/31
Health Services, Cachar, Silchar, vide letter dated 07.10.2013, who in turn
requested the doctor concerned to return the M.L. Register to respondent no.17,
which was not done till respondent no.17 retired on 31.05.2014.
17) The investigation of FIR lodged by Musstt. Saleha Khatun, the
wife of the victim, which was registered as Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012,
resulted in closure of investigation by submission of Final Form/Report No. 144
dated 29.12.2012. The said Final Form/Report dated 29.12.2012, was rejected
by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Silchar, by order dated 12.07.2013 and
direction was issued to the Officer-In-Charge, Katigorah P.S. to re-investigate
the case.
18) After re-investigation, a Final Form/Report was submitted by the
Investigating Officer on 30.04.2023. In the said context, it has been submitted
that the informant, namely, Saleha Khatun, had filed her objection petition no.
663/25 dated 23.04.2025, against the Final Form/Report. Thereupon, the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, vide order dated 23.04.2025, declined
to accept the Final Form/Report and directed registration of a complaint case
and the matter was fixed on 03.05.2025. The case was thereafter fixed on
10.07.2025.
19) The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior
Government Advocate are both ad-idem at the Bar that the complaint case is
presently pending for adjudication before the competent Court having
jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit
and proper case wherein this Court ought not to express any view on the
contentious issues raised by the petitioner, which would be the subject matter of
the criminal complaint case, which is admittedly pending for adjudication before
the competent Court having jurisdiction to saddle the accused person with
Page No.# 29/31
appropriate criminal liability in accordance with law. If any observation made by
this Court on merit, will have the tendency to prejudice either the complainant
or the accused. Hence, at this stage, the cases cited by the learned counsel for
the petitioner cannot be applied. Hence, the Court is of the considered opinion
that it should best be left to the learned Trial Court to adjudicate the complaint
case pending before it for disposal, without being influenced by anything
contained in this order.
20) Be that as it may, as discussed earlier, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the arrest of Md. Azizur Rahman, the father of the
petitioner, was not in accordance with law. Moreover, when the case of the
respondents is that the house of the petitioner was only 500 meters away from
Kalain Patrol Post, the police ought to have made an endeavour to inform the
family members of Md. Azizur Rahman of his health condition, which had started
deteriorating after he was brought to the Kalain Patrol Post so that the family
members of Md. Azizur Rahman could accompany him to Kalain F.R.U. and then
to Silchar Medical College and Hospital, Silchar.
21) Thus, the Court is inclined to hold that late Md. Azizur Rahman,
who was the husband of complainant in Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012 and
the father of the petitioner had died on 07.07.2012, while in police custody.
Moreover, the manner of arrest was without compliance with the provisions of
Sections 41B, 41C, 50 and 50A of the CrPC, the Court is inclined to hold the
petitioner, as well as the other legal representatives/ heirs, including the
complainant in Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012, to be entitled to
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakh only), which shall be paid by
the Govt. of Assam, Home and Political Department, represented by its
Secretary to the Government of Assam.
Page No.# 30/31
22) The aforesaid compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- is palliative in
nature and is without prejudice to the petitioner or other family members of
Azizur Rahman to claim higher compensation by approaching Civil Court having
jurisdiction. However, in the event a higher compensation is awarded by the
Court having jurisdiction, the compensation as awarded by this judgment and
order would be adjusted.
23) It is directed that the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-, as allowed
by this judgment and order shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of 3
(three) months from the date when the certified copy of this order is served at
the Office of the Home and Political Department, Government of Assam, failing
which the said amount would carry interest @ 6% (six percent) per annum on
and from the expiry of the period of three months from the date of service of a
certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall be receiving such compensation
for and on behalf of Musstt. Saleha Begum and other legal heirs of the
deceased, which is required to be distributed in accordance with their respective
share as they would be entitled to in accordance with the Mohammedan Law.
24) Needless to mention that the State would have the liberty to
recover the compensation and interest, if any, paid from the concerned police or
other officials who are found guilty in departmental proceedings, if any, ordered
against them.
25) It is reiterated that the learned Trial Court would adjudicate the
complaint case, arising out of Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012.
26) It is desired that the learned counsel for the petitioner would
instruct the petitioner that the certified copy of this judgment and order may be
produced by the complainant before the learned Trial Court, if so advised.
Page No.# 31/31
27) The writ petition is partly allowed by directing the State to pay
monetary compensation on terms as referred above.
28) There shall be no order as to cost.
JUDGE JUDGE .
Comparing Assistant