Gauhati High Court Awards ₹5 Lakh Compensation For Death During Illegal Police Custody, holding that a 2012 arrest in Assam did not comply with the statutory safeguards under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has directed the State of Assam to pay ₹5 lakh as compensation to the family of a man who died in July 2012 after being picked up by the police, holding that the arrest was illegal for non-compliance with the Code of Criminal Procedure and that the death occurred during illegal police custody [Sarifuddin v. The State of Assam and 17 Others].
A Division Bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund partly allowed the writ petition filed by the son of the deceased, Md. Azizur Rahman, who had alleged custodial torture and sought an independent enquiry, departmental action and compensation.
The case
According to the petition, Azizur Rahman was picked up by the police overnight on 6 and 7 July 2012 in connection with cases arising from a group clash and was taken to the Kalain Patrol Post. He collapsed there, was taken to the Kalain First Referral Unit, and was then referred to the Silchar Medical College and Hospital, where he was declared brought dead.
The State relied on the post-mortem and forensic reports, which recorded no external injury and gave the cause of death as syncope following coronary insufficiency. It also argued that the petitioner’s account had changed over time.
What the Court said
The Bench noted that the respondents had not specifically denied that there was no warrant, that no notice was issued under Section 41A of the CrPC, and that Sections 41B, 41C, 50 and 50A of the CrPC were not complied with. It held that the arrest:
“was illegal, being not in compliance with the statutory and legal requirement.”
The Court also noted that there was no record of the police informing the family or accompanying members of the family when the deceased was shifted for treatment, and that he was taken to Silchar, about 28 to 30 km away, in a police vehicle rather than an ambulance. It concluded that the death had occurred in police custody and that the petitioner and the family were entitled to compensation.
No finding on torture or criminal liability
The Bench recorded that a complaint case arising from Katigorah P.S. Case No. 291/2012 is pending before the trial court, and made no finding on the allegation of torture or on the criminal liability of any police personnel. It left those issues to the trial court. Those allegations remain untested, and the Court expressed no view on their merits.
The directions
The Court directed the Home and Political Department of the Government of Assam to pay ₹5,00,000 to the petitioner for himself and the other legal heirs within three months of service of a certified copy of the judgment, failing which the amount will carry interest at 6% per annum from the expiry of that period.
The Court described the compensation as palliative in nature and without prejudice to a claim for higher compensation before a civil court, with any higher award to be adjusted against this amount. The State has the liberty to recover the compensation and interest from police or other officials if they are found guilty in departmental proceedings, if any are ordered.
Why the judgment matters
The judgment applies the settled position that the State answers for a death in police custody and that compensation can be awarded in writ jurisdiction as a public law remedy, without waiting for the outcome of a criminal trial. Here, the Court rested its finding on the admitted non-compliance with the arrest safeguards in Sections 41B, 41C, 50 and 50A of the CrPC.
At the same time, the Court kept the question of torture and criminal responsibility apart from the compensation award, leaving the pending complaint case to be decided by the trial court without being influenced by the judgment.
Case Title: Sarifuddin v. The State of Assam and 17 Others [WP(C) No. 4329/2015]
Bench: Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund, Gauhati High Court
Date of Judgment: September 17, 2026
Appearances: P.K. Deka for the petitioner; D. Nath, Senior Government Advocate, with N. Kalita, Government Advocate, for the State