In the instant matter of Ajit Kumar v. State of Jharkhand, a petition was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution asking the court to order the state to compensate the petitioner for his 4 months of wrongful detention for violations of Sections 376(D), 302, and 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, as well as to order the filing of a First Information Report against the negligent police officers. The current case concerns the finding of the corpse of a 25-year-old woman who was identified as a specific person while she was still alive and delivered a statement in accordance with Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Thus, the petitioner was declared innocent by the court and released. The petitioner was described as a talented student who passed the Staff Selection Commission exam and was scheduled to appear for the interview before being wrongfully accused by the police in the current case, which destroyed his whole future. However, all three police officers were placed on administrative leave, and departmental actions were started.
Analysis of Court Order
Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi of the Jharkhand High Court’s single-judge bench ordered the State to give the petitioner compensation in the amount of Rs. 5 lakhs, which may be deducted from the salaries of the incompetent police personnel.
The Court considered the claim for compensation filed on the petitioner’s behalf under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner, a student, has been falsely accused of a crime for which he has not yet been found guilty, the court said, adding that he has also been languishing in jail for four months. Additionally, it drew reference to the widely acknowledged instance of unlawful imprisonment as established by the police themselves, given that the petitioner was the target of a malicious prosecution that resulted in harassment and unimaginable suffering. The court stated, The petitioner’s liberty and dignity, which are fundamental to his human rights, were jeopardised as he was taken into custody, and, ultimately, despite all the glory of the past, he was forced to face cynical abhorrence. This situation invites the public law remedy for grant of compensation for violation of the fundamental right, envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India for saving the life command, self-respect, and dignity.
The Court determined that the present petition may be maintained in accordance with Article 226 of the Constitution and noted that the Police serve as the primary pillar of state administration. It has a responsibility to see to it that lawbreakers are dealt with severely. However, it must uphold the legal requirements and the Constitution of India’s mandate in carrying out its duties. If it were to violate the law in the name of administration, it would undermine the entire basis of constitutional democracy. The Court determined that the current case was adequately made out for the petitioner to get compensation, and it ordered the State to pay the petitioner an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs for unlawfully holding him in prison. The Court also allowed the State the option of deducting the specified sum from the salaries of negligent police personnel. The Court stated that although the misery and humiliation the petitioner had previously experienced could not be undone, the abovementioned compensation will help the petitioner to overcome her previous experiences and go forward with her life.