Supreme Court of India
MOHAMMAD YASINversusSTATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) AND ORS.
- Citation
- 2009 INSC 974
- Decided
- 30 July 2009
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- DALVEER BHANDARI
Holding
The death was attributable to pre‑existing heart disease, the injuries were insufficient to cause death, and the respondents did not breach the D.K. Basu guidelines; therefore the appeal was dismissed.
Summary
Mohammad Yasin appealed against the Delhi High Court order that dismissed his petition seeking a CBI investigation and a FIR under s.302 IPC into the death of his brother Yunus (alias Anees) while in police custody. Yunus, a proclaimed offender with a history of multiple criminal cases, was arrested on 4 August 1999, suffered two superficial bruises during arrest, and was taken to the ESI Hospital where he was declared dead. A Board of Doctors and a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate inquiry concluded that death resulted from ventricular arrhythmias due to a hypertrophied, fibrotic heart with coronary atherosclerosis, and that the injuries were insufficient to cause death. The Supreme Court held that the respondents had not violated the D.K. Basu guidelines on custodial deaths and that police cannot torture a criminal despite his record. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the police violated the D.K. Basu directions on custodial deaths.
- Whether the death of Yunus was caused by police torture or by natural medical conditions.
- Whether the investigation should be transferred to the CBI and a case under s.302 IPC be registered.
Legislation cited
Subjects
custodial deathpolice tortureD.K. Basu guidelinesnatural deathproclaimed offenderSection 302 IPCpostmortem examinationSupreme Court
Judgment
[2009) 11 S.C.R. 1188
A MOHAMMAD YASIN
v.
STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) AND ORS.
(Criminal Appeal No. 1228 of 2002)
JULY 30, 2009
B
[DALVEER BHANDARI AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM
SHARMA, JJ.]
Custodial death - Allegations of - Deceased a
C proclaimed offender, bad character and criminal involved in
many cases - Held: Police and/or investigating agencies
cannot torture any criminal despite his bad criminal record -
On facts, injuries on deceased were simple in nature and
insufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature -
D Deceased died because of serious heart disease -
Respondents did not violate directions given by Supreme
Court in D.K. Basu's case as alleged - Penal Code, 1860
- s.302.
E Appellant's brother allegedly died in police custody.
The deceased was a proclaimed offender, bad character
and criminal involved in many cases. Appellant prayed for
directions to handover investigation into death of his
.brother to the Central Bureau of lnvestigation(CBI) and
for a further direction to SHO of the concerned police
F station, where the incident occurred, to register a case
under s.302 IPC. It was contended that the directions
given by the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu's case were
violated by the respondents.
G Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The police and/or investigating agencies
cannot torture any criminal despite his bad criminal
record. [Para 19] [1197-H]
H 1188
MOHAMMAD YASIN v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 1189
2.1. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate made a A
comprehensive inquiry. The Board of three Doctors, who
~onducted post-mortem examination of the deceased,
gave clear and categorical finding that the cause of death
~as due to ventricular arrhythmias consequent to old
tompromised heart in a person having hypertrophied B
heart (460 grits) myocardial fibrosis and atherosclerosis
of coronaries. A person having heart weight of 460 gms.
myocardial fibrosis and coronary atherosclerosis has
high risk of sudden death with or without provocation.
Two superficial injuries were found on the dead body. c
The Board of Doctors examined the injuries and came to
the conclusion that all injuries present over the body were
simple in nature and were insufficient to cause death
individually as well as collectively in ordinary course of
nature. [Paras 15, 21 and 22) (1195-D; 1198-A-D]
D
2.2. In the instant case, the deceased was arrested
at 1.30 pm and he was taken to the ESI hospital at 3.1 o
pm on the same day where he was declared brought
dead. The distance between the place from where the
accused was arrested and the ESI Hospital is about 96 E
kms., therefore, it seems that from the point of arrest till
the ESI hospital, the deceased was travelling in the car
all the time and on complaint of uneasiness he was taken
to the ESI hospital. [Para 23) [1198-D-E]
F
2.3. In view of the report of the Board of Doctors and
the Sub-Divisional Magistrate inquiry, it is difficult to reach
at any other conclusion except that the appellant's
brother had died because of his serious heart disease.
[Para 24) [1198-G]
G
3. The respondents did not violate the directions
given by this court in D.K. Basu's case. [Para 20] [1198-A]
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416,
H
1190 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 11 S.C.R.
A referred to. A
Case Law Reference:
(1997) 1 sec 416 referred to Para 9
B CRIMINAL APP ELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 1228 of 2002.
From the Judgment & Order dated 28.9.2001 of the High
Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Writ Petition No. 917
of 1999.
c
Vipin Gogia, Jaspreet Gogia for the Appellants.
P.P. Malhotra, ASG, Sadhna Sandhu, Anil Katiyar for the
Respondents.
D The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DALVEER BHANDARI, J. 1. This appeal is directed
against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High
Court passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.917 of 1999 on
E 28.9.2001.
2. The appellant Mohd. Yasin had filed a writ petition
before the Delhi High Court seeking directions to handover the
investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation into the
death of his elder brother Yunus alias Anees who died on
F 4.8.1999 in police custody of the police station Okhla Industrial
Area, New Delhi. The appellant further prayed for a direction
to the station house officer of the police station Okhla Industrial
Area to register a case under section 302 IPC against the
delinquent officer(s).
G
3. The High Court in the impugned order after perusing the
report of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the report of the
Board of Doctors who conducted postmortem examinatioo of
the deceased and came to the conclusion that the death of the
H appellant's brother was caused due to cardiac arrhythmias and
MOHAMMAD YASIN v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 1191
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
t~e petition was disposed of. A
4. The appellant being aggrieved by the impugned
judgment of the High Court has preferred this appeal.
5. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal
are recapitulated as under: B
In the intervening night at about 1.00 am on 4/5.8.1999,
the appellant received a telephonic call from one Afroz who is
a friend of the deceased Yunus, the elder brother of the
appellant, and was told that on 4.8.1999 the police took Yunus c
to the police station Okhla Industrial Area and that he also
accompanied Yun us to the police station. He also told that Yunus
was hospitalized at the ESI Hospital. The appellant who was
at Mumbai immediately came to Delhi and learnt that his
brother Yunus had died while he was in police custody.
D
6. It is also submitted that respondent no.5 Sub-Inspector
of Police Mukesh Walia had approached Afroz, ~ friend of
Yunus and threatened to implicate him in a false case under
the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -
unless he helped the police in nabbing Yunus. Under the said E
threat and coercion, Afroz went to the village of Yunus and
thereafter the police arrested Yunus. It is also incorporated in
the appeal that the inquiry was also conducted by the Sub-
Divisional Magistrate, Kalkaji, South District, New Delhi under
section 176 Cr.P.C. The statements of the police officials who F
went to arrest Yunus were recorded by the Sub-Divisional
Magistrate on 5.8.1999.
7. It is further stated in the appeal that Yunus was in good
health and he died in the police custody indicating that he did G
not die of natural death. The postmortem examination was
conducted on the body of the deceased Yunus at the All India
Institute of Medical Sciences (AllMS) on 6.8.1999 and
thereafter his dead body was handed over to the appellant in
the presence of other relatives of the appellant. At that time,
the appellant noticed injuries on the face and head of the H
1192 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 11 S.C.R.
A deceased. It is stated that the clothes of the deceased Yunus
were sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL),
New Delhi. In the report of the CFSL, blood of group A+ was
detected on the shirt of the deceased Yunus. It is pertinent to
mention that the doctors opined that the cause of death of
B Yunus was due to ventricular arrhythmias consequent to old
compromised heart in a person having hypertrophied heart
(460 gms.) myocardial fibrosis; atherosclerosis of coronaries
and that a person having heart weight of 460 gms. myocardial
fibrosis and coronary atherosclerosis has high risk of sudden
c death with or without provocation.
8. In the instant case, the police apprehended Yunus at
1.30 pm on 4.8.1999 and he was taken to th~ ESI Hospital at
3.10 pm on the same day where he was declared brought
dead.
D
9. The appellant relied on the directions given by this court
in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416 and
submitted that the respondents had violated these directions.
In Basu's case, the court observed that "the custodial death is
E perhaps one of the worst crime in a civilized society governed
by the rule of law. The rights inherent in Articles 21 and 22(1)
of the Constitution require to be jealously and scrupulously
protected. Expression of life or personal liberty in Article 21
includes right to live with human dignity and thus it would include
within itself a guarantee against torture and assault by the States •
F
or by its functionaries".
10. The instant case pertains to the custodial death. This
court examines such cases with extreme care and cautions.
Despite the fact that the matter has been examined by the High
G Court, this court also issued notice to the respondents and
examined the matter de novo. Pursuant to the notice of this
court, T.N. Mohan, DCP (HQ) in the office of Commissioner of
Police, l.P. Estate, New Delhi filed an affidavit. In the affidavit,
,
it is mentioned that the deceased was a proclaimed offender
H and a bad character of the police station Okhla Industrial Area,
MOHAMMAD YASIN v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 1193
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
Phase-I and was wanted by police in as many as nine cases, A
the details of which are as under:
1. FIR No.783/97 under Sections 407/379/411/120
IPC, PS Okhla Industrial Area.
2. FIR No.798/97 under Sections 407/379/411/120 B
IPC, PS Okhla Industrial Area.
3. FIR No.804/97 under Sections 407/379/411/120
IPC, PS Okhla Industrial Area.
4. FIR No.805/97 under Sections 407/379/411/120 c
IPC, PS.Okhla Industrial Area.
5. FIR No.828/97 under Sections 407/379/411/120
IPC, PS Okhla Industrial Area.
6. FIR No.818/98 under Sections 407/379/411/120 D
IPC, PS Okhla Industrial Area.
7. FIR No.855/97 under Sectio11 380 IPC, PS Okhla
Industrial Area.
E
,;
8. FIR No.947/98 under Section 380 IPC, PS Okhla
Industrial Area.
9. FIR No.33/99 under Sections 380/411 IPC, PS
~ Okhla Industrial Area.
F
11. It is mentioned in the counter affidavit that after
receiving the information, it was decided to send a police party
from Delhi to the district Gurgaon for the arrest of Mohd. Yunus
@ Anees and in this connection a team was constituted and
the necessary permission to go out of Delhi was obtained from
G
the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Delhi.
After taking required necessary permission, the police went to
" Gurgaon. It is submitted that, apart from being involved in a
large number of criminal cases, Mohd. Yunus @ Anees was a
proclaimed offender, bad character of Bundle 'A" and a
H
1194 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 11 S.C.R.
A desperate criminal. Mohd. Yunus was arrested at about 1.30
pm on 4.8.1999 with the help of Afroz. Mohd. Yunus struggled
to set himself free and while running away he fell down and
sustained two bruises. The dimensions of the injuries are as
under:
B
"(i) Abraded bruise of 1.4 x 1 cm over (L) side face below
eye 1 cm.
(ii) Abraded bruise 3 x 2 cm over front part of chin below
lip."
c
Mohd. Yunus was however, overpowered and apprehended.
When the van crossed Haryana-Delhi Border, he complained
of uneasiness and discomfort~ therefore, he was immediately
rushed to the nearest ESI Hospital where he was declared
brought dead.
0
12. In the counter affidavit, it is mentioned that despite the
admitted position that the deceased Mohd. Yunus had a past
history of heart ailments, the appellant has deliberately
suppressed this information from the court and on the contrary
E it was asserted that the deceased was completely hale and
hearty. It is further submitted that the appellant has made a
statement before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate wherein in no
uncertain terms he stated as under:
"Yunus got hearl attack about eight months back and
F
bye-pass surgery was performed. At that time, I was at
Mumbai. This bye-pass surgery was arranged by Afroz.
This was told to me over telephone, in Mumbai, by Afroz
seven to eight months before."
G 13. It is mentioned in the counter affidavit that directions
issued by this court in O.K. Basu (supra) have been followed
in true spirits. It is also mentioned that according to the opinion •
of doctors, a normal heart weighs around 240-300 grams
whereas the heart of the deceased was 460 grams and had
H the high risk of sudden death with or without provocation. Such
MOHAMMAD YASIN v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 1195
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
a grossly enlarged and overweight heart does not happen in a A
day or two but it will take at least 5 to 1O years wh;.::h in itself
indicates a long heart ailment which is supported both by the
medical evidence as well as the categorical statement of the
appellant himself.
B
14. It is also stated that the distance between the place of
arrest and the ESI hospital is 96 kms. One and half hour driving
time is absolutely normal, therefore, the allegation that the delay
of one and half hour shows that the deceased was first taken
to some place where he was tortured and injuries inflicted due
to which he died, is not only false but preposterous. c
15. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at
length and perused all relevant documents in detail. Mohd.
Yunus died in the police custody. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate
has made a comprehensive inquiry. In the inquiry report, it is D
<
mentioned that he reached at the All India Institute of Medial
Sciences (AllMS) mortuary around 11.30 pm in the night of
4.8.1999 and inspected the dead body of the deceased Yunus
@ Anees. The Station House Officer, Police Station Okhla
Industrial Area was also present. Two superficial injuries were E
found on the dead body. According to the Board of Doctors,
both the said injuries were simple in nature.
16. It was submitted that immediately after the incident, on
•. 5.8.1999 at 10.00 am, the information was sent to the
Chairman, National Human Rights Commission and the copies F
of the same were sent to the District Magistrate, Delhi and the
Deputy Commissioner (South) regarding the custodial death.
On the same day a Board of Doctors was constituted for the
postmortem, which comprised the following doctors:
G
Dr. O.P. Murti, Associate Professor, Department of
Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, All India Institute of
Medical Sciences (AllMS).
Dr. D.N. Bhardwaj, Assistant Professor, Forensic Medicine
and Toxicology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences H
1196 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 11 S.C.R.
A
A (AllMS).
Dr. Alexander Khaka, Specialist for Medicines, Safdarjung
Hospital.
17. The statements of the relatives of the deceased were
B recorded. The statements of a large number of police official
were also recorded. The Board of Doctors in their final report
observed as under:
"To the best of our knowledge and belief we are of "
considered opinion - Death in this case was due to
c ventricular arrhythmias consequent to old compromised
heart in a person having hypertrophied heart (460 gms.)
myocardial fibrosis and atherosclerosis of coronaries. A
person having heart weight of 460 gms. myocardial fibrosis
and coronary atherosclerosis have high risk of sudden
D death with or without provocation."
18. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate after comprehensive
inquiry arrived at the following conclusion:
"After perusal of the entire evidence on record, along with
E
the opinion of the experts (Board of Doctors), the following
points were come to the notice.
_ Anees @ Yunus was a registered Bad Character of
Bundle 'A' (the register which is maintained for the persons
•
F who are under constant and active surveillance) of police
station P.S. Okhla Industrial Area wanted in as many as
10 cases. He was declared proclaimed offender by the
court of law.
The police team, who brought the deceased from
G
district Gurgaon to Delhi after arresting him were quite
bonafide in their action and performed lawful duties
arresting the deceased. They had observed all the norms/
legal formalities before proceeding out station duty.
H The death of Anees @ Yunus had occurred in natural
MOHAMMAD YASIN v. STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) 1197
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
>-
course as per the report of the panel of doctors. A
The deceased was having a past hi!>tory of heart
ailment consequent to old compromised heart in a person
having hypertrophied heart (460 grams) myocardial fibrosis
atherosclerosis of coronaries.
B
The admission of the deceased in ESI Hospital after
he fell unconscious near Badarpur border clearly indicates
the sincere efforts of the police team who got him admitted
without any loss of time in the nearest possible hospital in
order to save his life. c
Now the only question is, how the injuries were
inflicted on the body of the deceased (Anees @ Yunus)
needs explanation. In this regard the panel of doctors who
had conducted the postmortem was examined separately D.
and the police team and eye-witnesses. Afroz was also put
to cross-examination about the infliction of the injuries. The
cause of injuries were explained by them that the accused
put resistance at the time of his arrest and in the process
the injuries were inflicted which are not willingly, were not
sufficient to cause death. E
In the light of above, I am of the considered opinion
that Anees @ Yunus died due to heart ailment which is
explained by doctors in details and categorically opined
-
~
that the deceased had high risk of sudden death with or
without provocation and thus a natural death. I don't find
any of the police officer of the team individually or
F
collectively responsible in the death of the deceased
Anees@ Yunus and none of them is found guilty."
19. It is indeed unfortunate that the deceased died in the G
I.. police custody. We have carefully examined this case from
every angle particularly from the angle of his past criminal
record. The police and/or investigating agencies cannot torture
any criminal despite his bad criminal record.
H
1198 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 11 S.C.R.
A 20. In our considered view, in this case, the respondents
have not violated the directions given by this court in D.K.
Basu's case (supra).
21. The Board of three Doctor~ gave clear and categorical
B finding that the cause of death was due to ventricular
arrhythmias consequent to old compromised heart in a person
having hypertrophied heart (460 gms) myocardial fibrosis and
atherosclerosis of coronaries. A person having heart weight of
460 gms. myocardial fibrosis and coronary atherosclerosis has
high risk of sudden death with ur without provocation.
c
22. The Board of Doctors further examined the injuries and
came to the conclusion that all injuries present over the body
were antemortem, recent in duration and were caused by blunt
force. All injuries were simple in nature and were insufficient
o to cause death individually as well as collectively in ordinary
course of nature.
23. In the instant case, the deceased was arrested at 1.30
pm on 4.8.1999 and he was taken to the ESI hospital at 3.10
pm on the same day where he was declared brought dead. The
E distance between the place from where the accused was
arrested and the ESI Hospital is about 96 kms., therefore, it
seems that from the point of arrest till the ESI hospital, the
deceased was travelling in the car all the time and on complaint
of uneasiness he was taken to the ESI hospital. We have
F carefully examined the matter in great detail and with extreme
care.
24. In view of the report of the Board of Doctors and the
Sub-Divisional Magistrate inquiry, it is difficult to reach at any
G other conclusion except that Mohd. Yunus had died because
of his serious heart disease.
25. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no
interference is called for. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.
H 8.8.8. Appeal dismissed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "custodial death"Sign in to search