New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to register a criminal case and investigate the custodial death of one Shravan Suryavanshi @ Sarvan Tamre, holding that the State of Chhattisgarh had made a deliberate attempt to cover up the circumstances of his death despite a judicial inquiry report squarely attributing it to custodial violence.
The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta also enhanced the interim compensation payable to the deceased's legal heirs to Rs. 25 lakh, terming the Rs. 1 lakh awarded by the High Court as a mere pittance.
The deceased had been arrested on 18 January 2024 by Police Station Seepat, District Bilaspur, in connection with an FIR registered under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915, for possession of six litres of raw Mahua liquor valued at Rs. 1,200, an offence carrying a maximum sentence of three years. Following his arrest, he was lodged in Central Jail, Bilaspur, referred to CIMS Hospital on 21 January 2024 owing to deteriorating health, and died the next morning. The post-mortem recorded multiple antemortem injuries, including a laceration on the occipital scalp and contusions on the thigh and nape of the neck, of varying ages ranging from one day to six days prior to death, and attributed the cause of death to cardio-respiratory arrest arising from a head injury caused by a hard and blunt object.
As the death occurred in custody, the Jail Superintendent sought a judicial inquiry under Section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which was conducted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, and concluded on 22 July 2024 that the death appeared to have resulted from complications arising from the head injury. Despite this, the State neither registered an FIR nor initiated action against the officials concerned. The deceased's widow and children accordingly moved the High Court of Chhattisgarh by way of a writ petition seeking Rs. 50 lakh in compensation and a direction for prosecution of the responsible officers.
By judgment dated 3 October 2024, a Division Bench of the High Court held that the deceased had indeed been subjected to custodial violence resulting in his death, and directed the State to pay compensation of Rs. 1 lakh, with interest at 9 per cent per annum in case of delay, treating this as exemplary damages for breach of public law duty. However, the High Court granted no consequential direction for registration of an FIR or investigation into the death, prompting the petitioners to approach the Supreme Court.
While issuing notice, the Court had, by its order dated 28 July 2026, noted that the State's counter affidavit did not disclose any steps taken towards registration of an FIR or investigation, and that the compensation awarded appeared wholly inadequate given the gravity of the loss. It directed the Director General of Police and the Principal Secretary (Home), Chhattisgarh, to remain present through video conferencing on the next date. When the matter was taken up on 4 August 2026, the Director General of Police took the position that since the Section 176 inquiry report had not been received by the police, there was no occasion to register a criminal case, an explanation the Court found impossible to accept.
"The explanation offered that neither any police action nor any disciplinary action was taken against the persons responsible because the judicial inquiry report had not been served upon the police officials is a cover-up story and an attempt to pull the wool over the Court's eyes."
The Court noted that the State's own reply before the High Court had disclosed that the judicial inquiry was underway and its report was awaited, establishing that the authorities were fully conscious of the pending inquiry, and that the report itself was on record when the High Court decided the writ petition. It further observed a stark discrepancy between the medical report prepared at the time of death, which recorded the cause as cardiopulmonary arrest with aspiration pneumonitis linked to alcohol withdrawal and made no mention of any head injury, and the post-mortem report, which recorded multiple external injuries and attributed death to a head injury caused by a blunt object. The post-mortem report, the Court noted, was placed on record for the first time only pursuant to its own order of 28 July 2026, and had not been produced before the High Court.
Having regard to the varying ages of the injuries recorded in the post-mortem, indicating that they were sustained over the course of the deceased's custody, the Court held that the facts warranted immediate registration of an FIR and a thorough investigation, which the State authorities had deliberately avoided.
"In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the firm opinion that the ends of justice require that the investigation into the circumstances leading to the custodial death of Shri Shravan be entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation and that all officials found responsible for the custodial violence, upon completion of the investigation, be proceeded against and prosecuted in accordance with law."
The Court accordingly directed the Director, CBI, to ensure forthwith the registration of a regular criminal case in relation to the custodial death, to be investigated by a senior officer, with a report to be placed before the Court on the next date of hearing. The conduct of the State officials who failed to act upon the judicial inquiry report was directed to be examined as part of the investigation itself. The Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, was directed to transmit the complete case records to the CBI through special messenger within a week.
Recording that the High Court's finding that the deceased was the sole breadwinner of his family was not disputed by the State, the Court directed, as an interim measure, that compensation of Rs. 25 lakh be paid by the State of Chhattisgarh to the petitioners within four weeks, with the final quantum to be determined upon adjudication of the petition. A copy of the order was directed to be transmitted to the Principal Secretary (Home), the Director General of Police, the Director General (Prisons), Chhattisgarh, and the Director, CBI. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 13 October 2026.
Case Title : Lahra Bai Tamre & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors., Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 728 of 2026
