Khursheed Ahmad Chohan v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.
Background
The appellant, a police constable in Jammu and Kashmir, was summoned to the Senior Superintendent of Police's office in connection with a narcotics inquiry and was allegedly detained and brutally tortured in custody for six days, resulting in amputation of his genitals, electric shock injuries, and a fractured foot, before being hospitalised in a comatose state. Instead of registering a case against the police personnel involved, the authorities lodged an FIR against the appellant himself for attempted suicide under Section 309 IPC, based on a claim that he had tried to cut his own vein. When the appellant and his wife's repeated complaints to police and the Deputy Inspector General went unanswered, they approached the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh seeking registration of an FIR against the police officials, transfer of investigation to the CBI, and quashing of the FIR against the appellant. The High Court only ordered a preliminary departmental enquiry and declined to quash the FIR or transfer the probe, prompting the appellant to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court found the "suicide" narrative implausible given that the medical report from SKIMS Srinagar recorded injuries (a large scrotal laceration with both testicles surgically removed, bruises on buttocks and thighs, blunt trauma signs, and multiple fractures) entirely inconsistent with self-harm and consistent with custodial torture. It noted that the FIR used to justify the appellant's summons was itself registered after his detention had already begun, making his custody illegal from the outset. Invoking Article 21 jurisprudence on custodial violence (including Nilabati Behera and Sube Singh), the Court held this was an extreme case meeting every threshold for compensation: the violation was patent, gross, and shocking to the conscience, and was backed by medical evidence. It directed the CBI to register a case and investigate within 90 days, with responsible officers to be arrested within a month; quashed the fabricated FIR against the appellant; and ordered the Union Territory to pay Rs. 50,00,000 as interim compensation, recoverable later from the guilty officials.
Lesson Learnt
When state officials inflict custodial torture and then try to cover it up with a retaliatory or fabricated FIR against the victim, constitutional courts can step in under Articles 32/226/136/142 to order an independent CBI probe, quash the retaliatory FIR, and award substantial interim compensation: sovereign immunity is no defence to fundamental rights violations by the state.