Read Time: 10 minutes

The Principal Sessions Judge at Kishtwar in Jammu and Kashmir has ordered judicial inquiry into the death of one Abdul Latief, an accused under provisions of Narcotics, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in police custody at Kishtwar police station on March 6, 2022.

Court has directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to conduct an inquiry into this case within two weeks and on completion of the inquiry the CJM has been directed to draw a report accordingly. Court has stressed that the inquiry of the CJM will not act as a bar to continue the police investigation.

The order has been passed on an application filed by the Jammu and Kashmir District Bar Association Kishtwar. The order states that the Bar Association had filed the application based on the media reports.

According to the order, Latief was arrested and kept in the custody at Police Station in Chatroo in Kishtwar District. Latief was produced before the court and was remanded to the custody of the police twice. When the court had remanded him to police custody the second time, it had directed the police to produce him before the competent court on expiry of his remand period.

As per the order, the Bar Association contended that it was the legal obligation of the officials of the Police Station to ensure Latief’s safety, however, they ignored to do so as a result of which he died while in the lock-up of the police station.

The Bar Association contended that Latief died under mysterious circumstances and the Station House Officer and other officials were under legal oblation to file a report regarding his death to the same court which remanded him to custody.

It was also contended that the judicial magistrate under whose jurisdiction the death had occurred was under obligation to hold an enquiry, however, neither was a report filed by the police nor was enquiry conducted by the magistrate.

The Bar Association has alleged that thereby the officials and the magistrate have violated the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the relevant police rules.

On the contrary, the police officials contended that the Bar Association has no locus standi to file such an application and that they were merely relying on the media reports to make such tall allegations.

It was further submitted that the District Magistrate had on March 7, 2022 immediately issued an order to the Sub Divisional Magistrate to conduct an enquiry into the death and submit a report within 15 days.  The police officials said that Latief’s death is a suicide and there were no suspicious circumstances surrounding it.

It was further submitted that the enquiry is complete and the report has been kept in a sealed cover in view of this application. The officials further averred that they have no objection if a Judicial Magistrate conducts an enquiry.

The police officials further claimed that Latief was arrested because he was in possession of 8-9 Kgs of cannibis and that he was treated well and given all the facilities that he needed. It was argued that Latief had hung himself at 9.45 PM on March 6th, 2022 with the border of a blanket that was provided to him. It was argued that he had not complained of any physical or mental illness.

Court, on hearing the submissions made by both the parties, noted that the Bar Association is a statutory body under Bar Council of India Rules and that it is very much concerned with the fundamental rights of citizens of the UT of Jammu & Kashmir, therefore, it has the locus to file an application seeking judicial inquiry into Latief’s death in police custody.

Court further held that while it is very clear that Latief died in police custody, it cannot determine whether Latief died of suicide or was killed due to ill-treatment by police.

Court also noted that according to Section 176 of Criminal Procedure Code only a judicial magistrate can hold inquiry into custodial deaths, the court further held that the inquiry by judicial magistrate is not a substitution to police investigation but merely an addition.

Accordingly, Court held that in the present case the police officials should immediately have registered an FIR upon the death of an accused in custody and the same had to be forwarded to the judicial magistrate who should have conducted an enquiry in the case.

Court noted that in the given case neither an FIR was filed by the police, nor was it forwarded to the judicial magistrate and nor was a report filed by the court informing of his death. Court, thus, directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to conduct an inquiry into this case.

Case title: Jammu & Kashmir District Bar Association Vs District Magistrate Kishtwar