Introduction:

In a case before the Orissa High Court, Basanti Puhan sought compensation for the custodial death of her son, Amrit Puhan. Alleging that her son died after falling from a moving train while under the custody of the police, Basanti Puhan approached the court seeking justice. The court’s ruling on this matter sheds light on the duty of care owed by authorities to individuals in custody and the issue of vicarious liability of the state.

Arguments:

Basanti Puhan’s counsel, Mr. Byomakesh Tripathy, argued that the deceased was subjected to brutal assault by both the father of the girl with whom he eloped and the police officials. It was contended that the deceased’s death was a result of negligence and misconduct on the part of the authorities responsible for his custody. The petitioner sought compensation for the loss of her son and held the state liable for the actions of its employees.

On behalf of the State, counsel Mr. G.R. Mohapatra argued that the deceased was not in police custody at the time of the alleged incident. However, it was acknowledged that the police officials were accompanying him on the train journey. The respondents denied any negligence on their part and contested the petitioner’s claims of custodial death.

Court’s Judgement:

Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi, in his ruling, emphasized the duty of care and caution owed by the police and prison authorities to individuals under their custody. Despite the State’s claim that the deceased was not formally arrested, the court noted the behavior of the authorities, which suggested otherwise. Relying on legal precedents, the court held the state vicariously liable for the custodial death and ordered an interim compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 to be paid by the State of Odisha to the petitioner.