HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI WP CRL.(MD). No.1392 of 2026 and W.P.M.P.Crl.(MD)No.341 to 344 of 2026 A.Rajeshkannan … Petitioner Vs 1. The Home Secretary, Office of the Home Secretary, Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Head of Police Force, Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Dr.Radhakrishna Salai, Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004. 3. The Additional Director General of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 13.03.2026
Pronounced on: 10.06.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
WP CRL.(MD). No.1392 of 2026 and
W.P.M.P.Crl.(MD)No.341 to 344 of 2026
A.Rajeshkannan … Petitioner
Vs
1. The Home Secretary,
Office of the Home Secretary,
Govt. of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Office of the Director General of Police,
Head of Police Force,
Govt. of Tamil Nadu,
Dr.Radhakrishna Salai, Mylapore,
Chennai- 600 004.

3. The Additional Director General
of Police,
Office of Additional Director
General of Police (A.D.G.P.), Crime Branch Crime Investigation Department (C.B.C.I.D).
No.220, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai-8.
4. The Inspector General of Polcie,
Office of the Inspector General of Police,
South Zone,
Madurai, Madurai District.
5. The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.
6. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,
Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manamadurai Sub Division, Sivagangai District..
7. The Inspector of Police, Manamadurai Police Station, Sivagangai District..
8. The Inspector of Police,
Office of Inspector of Police (CBCID)
Kangirangal,
Tiruppathur Road, Sivagangai District..
9. The Dean,
Government Medical College Hospital,
Sivagangai,
Sivagangai District.
10. The Dean,
Government Rajaji Hospital,
Goripalayam,
Madurai District. … Respondents
Prayer:- To issue a Writ of Mandamus, Orders or direction in the nature of Writ to the Respondents 1,2,4,5,6 and 7 to register an independent criminal case for the offence of murder arising out of brutal custodial torture under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with the appropriate provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (as amended), based on the complaint dated 08.03.2026 preferred by the father of the deceased. The petitioner has further prayed for transfer of the investigation to the third respondent herein, namely, the Crime Branch–Criminal Investigation Department (CBCID), and for a direction that the investigation be periodically monitored by this Court and completed within a period of 60 days in accordance with the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
For Petitioner : Mr.Henri Patrick Tiphange
For R1, R9 and R10 : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan,
Additional Advocate General,
Assisted by Mr.C.Satheesh,
Government Advocate(Civil Side)
For R2 to R8 : Mr.S.Ravi
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
Heard Either sides elaborately.
2. Given the subsequent developments recorded before this Court, namely:
(i) immediate registration of Crime No.21 of 2026 under Section 196
BNSS;
(ii) transfer of investigation to CBCID by the Director General of Police;
(iii) appointment of a Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID as
Investigating Officer pursuant to the orders of this Court;
(iv) securing of CCTV footage;
(v) collection of hospital, prison and station records;
(vi) examination of the co-accused; and,
(vii) most significantly, alteration of the case into an offence under Section 103 BNS read with Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on the strength of the remand proceedings and preliminary forensic materials, this Court may dispose of the writ petition while preserving limited supervisory safeguards and issuing broader systemic directions. The following draft may suitably form the concluding portion of the order:
3. Before parting with this matter, this Court deems it necessary to place on record its appreciation for the manner in which the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai, discharged his solemn constitutional and statutory duties while considering the remand of the deceased Akash Delison on 07.03.2026.
4. The remand report reveals that instead of mechanically authorising judicial custody, the learned Judicial Magistrate personally visited the Government Medical College Hospital, Sivagangai, identified the accused through the duty doctor, interacted with him, noticed the extensive injury to his right leg, elicited from him the circumstances leading to the injury and faithfully recorded the allegations made by him regarding custodial torture and ill-treatment. The learned Magistrate has further recorded the explanation offered by the accused regarding the scratches found on his body and has specifically noted the complaint of torture made against the police personnel.
5. The importance of such judicial vigilance cannot be overstated. A remand proceeding is not a mere administrative formality. The remand Court is often the first constitutional safeguard available to a citizen after arrest. The duty of the remand Magistrate extends beyond examining the papers produced by the investigating agency and includes a meaningful interaction with the accused so as to ascertain whether constitutional guarantees under Articles 20, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India have been observed.
6. In the considered view of this Court, the remand report dated 07.03.2026 assumes immense evidentiary significance, not because it establishes guilt against any individual, but because it constitutes a contemporaneous judicial record made at a point of time when the injured accused was alive, under treatment and available for direct interaction with a judicial officer. Such records form an important part of the truth-seeking process in all allegations involving custodial violence.
7. The materials presently available disclose certain disturbing features. The deceased sustained a grievous injury to his right leg. Allegations of custodial torture were specifically recorded by the remand Magistrate. Within a few hours of such remand, the accused, while under medical treatment and judicial custody, succumbed. The proximity between the allegation, the injury and the subsequent death undoubtedly justified the intervention of this Court at the initial stage and warranted close monitoring till an independent investigative mechanism was put in place.
8. However, subsequent developments indicate substantial compliancewith the concerns expressed by this Court. Investigation has been transferred to CBCID. A Deputy Superintendent of Police has been appointed as Investigating Officer. CCTV footage has been secured. Relevant medical, prison and police records have been collected. The remand proceedings have been examined. The co-accused has been examined. Most importantly, based on the remand report of the learned Judicial Magistrate and the preliminary postmortem materials, the offence has already been altered into one under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
9. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the immediate objectives for which the present writ petition was entertained stand substantially achieved. Continuation of day-to-day monitoring by this Court may not be necessary at this stage. At the same time, the seriousness of the allegations and the public importance of the issues involved warrant certain systemic observations.
10. Custodial violence remains one of the gravest affronts to the rule of law. The State is vested with coercive powers to investigate crime; however, such powers can never extend to infliction of torture. The constitutional promise under Article 21 does not end at the gates of a police station. Every person, irrespective of the allegations against him, retains his fundamental right to life, dignity and bodily integrity.
11. This Court notices from the records placed before it, including the communications of the Directorate of Medical Education and Research regarding implementation of the Medico Legal Examination and Post mortem reporting (MedLEaPR), that the State has already initiated measures towards digitisation, standardisation and scientific documentation of medico-legal examinations and post-mortem procedures. Such efforts deserve to be strengthened and implemented in their true spirit.
12. Accordingly, while refraining from issuing policy mandates in the abstract, this Court observes that all authorities concerned shall ensure strict adherence to:
(i) the safeguards governing arrest and detention;
(ii) the mandate of judicial scrutiny during remand proceedings;
(iii) the statutory requirements relating to custodial death investigations;
(iv) scientific preservation of CCTV footage and electronic evidence;
(v) proper medico-legal documentation and post-mortem protocols;
(vi) the objectives underlying the Medico Legal Examination and Post mortem reporting system and other forensic modernisation initiatives undertaken by the State.
13. This Court further records its appreciation for the prompt intervention of the Tmt.M.Afzal Fathima, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai, whose remand proceedings ensured preservation of a crucial contemporaneous account that now forms part of the investigative record. Judicial sensitivity at the remand stage often becomes the most effective institutional safeguard against abuse of custodial power.
14. Since the investigation is now being conducted by CBCID under the supervision of a Deputy Superintendent of Police and the case has already been altered to incorporate the appropriate penal provisions, this Court leaves it open to the Investigating Officer to proceed independently, fairly, impartially and uninfluenced by any observations contained in this order, except to the extent of ensuring a thorough investigation into all aspects emerging from the materials on record.
15. The Investigating Officer shall complete the investigation as expeditiously as possible and file the final report before the jurisdictional Court in accordance with law.
16. With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.
10-06-2026
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Sml
To
1. The Home Secretary,
Office of the Home Secretary,
Govt. of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Office of the Director General of Police,
Head of Police Force,
Govt. of Tamil Nadu,
Dr.Radhakrishna Salai, Mylapore,
Chennai- 600 004.

3. The Additional Director General
of Police,
Office of Additional Director
General of Police (A.D.G.P.), Crime Branch Crime Investigation Department (C.B.C.I.D).
No.220, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai-8.
4. The Inspector General of Polcie,
Office of the Inspector General of Police,
South Zone,
Madurai, Madurai District.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.
6. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,
Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manamadurai Sub Division, Sivagangai District..
7. The Inspector of Police,
Manamadurai Police Station, Sivagangai District..
8. The Inspector of Police,
Office of Inspector of Police (CBCID)
Kangirangal,
Tiruppathur Road, Sivagangai District..
9. The Dean,
Government Medical College Hospital, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.
10. The Dean,
Government Rajaji Hospital, Goripalayam, Madurai District.
11.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 
L.VICTORIA GOWRI,J
Sml
ORDER
IN
WP CRL.(MD) No.1392 of 2026
Date : 10/06/2026