Premium
This is an archive article published on April 16, 1999

Torture case: Inquiry demanded

NEW DELHI, April 15: A Karkardooma Sessions court has written to the District Judge, seeking to initiate an inquiry against a Tihar Jail ...

.

NEW DELHI, April 15: A Karkardooma Sessions court has written to the District Judge, seeking to initiate an inquiry against a Tihar Jail superintendent, H.P. Meena, in connection with a torture case in judicial custody. The order was passed after Additional Sessions Judge ASJ Prithvi Raj read the replies forwarded by both the Chief Medical Officer CMO of Swami Dayanand Hospital and Meena8217;s representative in the case.

The court had ordered Swami Dayanand hospital to look into the nature of the injuries the complainant, Tehseen, had sustained, after his counsel, W.A. Ansari, moved an application against Meena.

The CMO of the hospital was served a show cause notice when he failed to adhere to the ASJ8217;s direction to get Tehseen medically examined by a board of two doctors.

The CMO, Dr Amitabh Singh, was summoned to court on April 5 to file his reply. In his reply to the judge, the doctor admitted to ignoring the court order. 8220;I overlooked the request for giving an opinion about the nature of the injury and duration of the injury as per the direction of the court.8221; He apologised for his mistake, which according to him was 8220;unintentional8221;. His reply further said that the lapse on his part was due to work pressure. 8220;No disregard was meant to the court,8221; the doctor said.

On the same day, the court also received the medical report from GTB hospital that confirmed the injuries Tehseen had sustained. The report said that the injuries were the result of lathi blows and were three days old. Tehseen sustained a fracture on the left hand and the left thigh.

The judge also read Meena8217;s reply that said that Tehseen had refused to cooperate with the police when they tried to search his belongings. According to the reply, a sharp object was found in possession of an inmate, who alleged that Tehseen had made it. 8220;When we went to check his belongings, he did not cooperate with us. Apparently, a tiff between the Tehseen and the inmate took place in which the latter hit the complainant with a stick,8221; the reply mentioned.

In his letter to the District Judge, ASJ Raj observed: 8220;The jail authorities on one hand deny the incident and on the other hand they admit that an inmate hit Tehseen. This revelation clearly shows that accused, Tehseen, had received injuries in the presence of the jail authorities.8221;

Story continues below this ad

The judge further said: 8220;In the interest of justice and to safeguard the fundamental right of the accused, an immediate inquiry should be held in this regard,8221; adding that it was important to fix responsibility and punish the culprits.

 

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement