Supreme Court orders CBI probe into Chhattisgarh custodial death; slams DGP, State officials for cover-up

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the custodial death of a Chhattisgarh man who died four days after being arrested for allegedly possessing six litres of raw Mahua liquor [Lahra Bai Tamre & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.]

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta found that State authorities had failed to register a criminal case despite a judicial inquiry into the death of one Shravan.

The Court rejected the State officials' explanation that no action was taken because the judicial inquiry report had not reached the police.

The Court termed the State's stand a “cover-up story” and an attempt to “pull the wool over the Court’s eyes.”

Therefore, it directed the CBI to immediately register a criminal case and investigate both the custodial death and the conduct of State officials who failed to take appropriate action.

“We are of the firm opinion that the ends of justice require that the investigation into the circumstances leading to the custodial death of Shri Shravan (Deceased) be entrusted to the CBI and that all officials found responsible for the custodial violence, upon completion of the investigation, be proceeded against and prosecuted in accordance with law,” the Court said.

The Court also directed the Chhattisgarh government to pay ₹25 lakh as interim compensation to Shravan’s family after noting that he was the sole breadwinner and had died an unnatural death while in State custody.

Shravan was arrested on January 18, 2024 under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and subsequently lodged at central jail in Bilaspur. After his health deteriorated, he was taken to CIMS Hospital on January 21 where he died the next morning.

His post-mortem revealed multiple injuries, including a laceration on the back of his head and contusions on his thigh and neck. The cause of death was recorded as cardio-respiratory arrest due to complications arising from a head injury caused by a hard and blunt object.

A judicial inquiry under Section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was thereafter conducted into the death. The judicial magistrate at Bilaspur submitted the inquiry report in July 2024, finding that the death appeared to have resulted from complications arising from the head injury.

When no action followed, Shravan's wife and daughters approached the Chhattisgarh High Court seeking ₹50 lakh compensation and action against the officials responsible.

The High Court held that Shravan had died due to violence suffered in custody, but awarded his family ₹1 lakh without directing registration of an FIR.

The family then moved Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, the Chhattisgarh DGP said that the police had not registered a criminal case because they had never received the judicial inquiry report into Shravan's death.

The Court found this explanation untenable. It noted that the State had itself told the High Court that a judicial inquiry into the custodial death was underway and that its report was awaited. The inquiry report was also part of the record when the High Court decided the case.

The Supreme Court, therefore, termed the DGP's stand “patently false and wholly reprehensible”

"Having regard to the age of the injuries noted in the post-mortem report, particularly Injury No. 2, being the laceration on the occipital scalp which was opined to be within one day, and Injuries Nos. 5 and 6 which were opined to be 2 to 6 days old, the possibility of the deceased having sustained these multiple injuries spread over the period of his custody cannot be ruled out,"the Court said.

In view of these findings, the Court said the circumstances warranted immediate registration of an FIR into the custodial death. It added that the State authorities had “conveniently and deliberately tried to cover up” the matter.

It also directed the CBI to examine the conduct of State officials who failed to act after the judicial inquiry report was submitted.

The investigating officer was directed to place the probe report before the Supreme Court on the next date of hearing on October 13.

The Chhattisgarh DGP was further directed to send the complete case records to the CBI Director through a special messenger within one week.

[Read Judgment]