DR. MEHMOOD NAYYAR AZAM versus STATE OF CHATTISGARH AND ORS.

Citation: [2012] 8 S.C.R. 651 · Decided: 03-08-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2012] 8 S.C.R. 651 
DR. MEHMOOD NAYYAR AZAM 
v. 
STATE OF CHATTISGARH AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Noo. 5703 of 2012) 
AUGUST 03, 2012 
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.) 
A 
B 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 21 - Right to life -
Custodial torture - Compensation for - Appellant-doctor 
arrested in respect of alleged criminal offences and sent to 
C 
police custody - Self-humiliating words were written on a 
placard and the appellant was asked to hold it and 
photographs were taken - The photographs were circulated in 
general public and were also filed by one of the respondents 
in a revenue proceeding - Appellant sought public law remedy 
D 
for grant·of compensation - High Court arrived at the finding 
that appellant was indeed subjected to custodial torture and 
accordingly directed him to submit representation to the State 
Government for grant of compensation - Appellant submitted 
such representation, but the State Government rejected the 
E 
same - Appellant thus did not receive any compensation for 
number of years - On appeal, held: The precious right 
guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be denied 
to convicts, undertrials, detenus and other prisoners in 
custody, except according to the procedure established by law 
F 
by placing such reasonable restrictions as permitted by law -
When an accused is in custody, his Fundamental Rights are 
not abrogated in toto - Any treatment meted out to an accused 
while he is in custody which causes humiliation and mental 
trauma corrodes the concept of human dignity - On facts, 
G 
clearly the appellant underwent mental torture at the hands 
of insensible police officials and was subjected to social 
humiliation - The inhuman treatment can be well visualized 
when the appellant came out from custody and witnessed his 
651 
H 
652 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 8 S.C.R. 
A photograph being circulated with the self-condemning words 
written on it - This withers away the very essence of life as 
enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution - Jn the facts 
and circumstances of the case, appellant entitled to Rs.5 
lakhs as compensation - Respondent-State directed to grant 
B such amount and later recover it from the salary of the erring 
officials - Human Rights - Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights, 1948 - Article 5 -Police - Duty of the police authorities. 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 32 and 226 - Writ 
proceedings seeking enforcement or protection of 
C fundamental rights - Grant of 'compensation' in such 
proceedings - Nature of - Held: When the court moulds the 
relief by granting 'compensation' in proceedings under Article 
32 or 226 seeking enforcement or protection of fundamental . 
rights, it does so under the public law by way of penalizing the 
D wrongdoer and fixing the liability for the ..public wrong on the 
State which has failed in its public duty to protect the 
fundamental rights of the citizen - The payment of 
compensation in such cases is not to be understood, as it is 
generally understood in a civil action for damages under the 
E private law but in the broader sense of providing relief by an 
order of making 'monetary amends' under the public Jaw for 
the wrong done due to breach of public duty, by not protecting 
the fundamental rights of the citizen - The compensation is 
in the nature of 'exemplary damages' awarded against the 
F wrongdoer for the breach of its public Jaw duty and is 
independent of the rights available to the aggrieved party to 
claim compensation under the private law in an action based 
on tort, through a suit instituted in a court of competent 
jurisdiction or/and prosecute the offender under the penal law 
G - Public Law remedy. 
H 
Words and Phrases - "harassment" and "torture" -
Meaning of. 
The appellant, an Ayurvedic Doctor with a B.A.M.S. 
DR. MEHMOOD NAYYAR AZAM v. STATE OF 
653 
CHATTISGARH 
degree, used to raise agitations and spread awareness 
A 
against exploitation of people belonging to weaker and 
marginalized sections of the society which apparently 
hurt the vested interests of the local coal mafia, trade 
union leaders, police officers and other groups. He was 
arrested in respect of the alleged offence under Indian 
B 
Penal Code, 1860 and the Electricity Act, 2003. There was 
a direction by the Magistrate for judicial remand but 
thereafter instead of taking him to jail, the next day he was 
brought to the police station. In police custody, self-
humiliating words wer

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.