Madras High Court Orders ₹25 Lakh Interim Compensation in Sivaganga Custodial Death Case

Quick Summary:

• The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government to pay ₹25 lakh as interim compensation to the family of B. Ajith Kumar,a temple security guard who died in police custody in sivaganga district last month.
• This is along with ₹7.50 lakh already given as compensation, which the court deemed inadequate by comparing similar cases of custodial torture.
• A government job has been given to Ajith Kumar’s brother and land provided to their mother as part of compensation efforts.
• The case has been transferred to the Central Bureau of Inquiry (CBI), which has begun its probe and collected relevant documents from multiple authorities.
• Counsel for petitioners expressed concerns that Witness Protection Scheme provisions for safeguarding witnesses had not yet been implemented.
• The court instructed Principal District Judge, Sivaganga, to resolve applications for witness protection within seven working days and scheduled further hearing on August 20.

Indian Opinion Analysis:

The High Court’s directive reflects an ongoing judicial effort toward accountability in custodial deaths, addressing both financial aid for victims’ families and systemic gaps requiring correction. While interim compensation raises hopes for justice,it also signals recognition that institutional failures leading to such tragedies demand substantive remedies beyond monetary assistance. Transferring investigations into alleged custodial torture cases like these under CBI supervision enhances clarity but underscores gaps in local enforcement mechanisms.

Moreover, lackluster implementation of witness protection provisions highlights broader challenges concerning compliance with established safeguards meant for vulnerable individuals during high-stakes investigations. As india continues scrutinizing justice processes related to human rights violations like this incident, timely action on judicial directives remains vital-not only for resolving individual grievances but also setting precedents deterring future misconduct by law enforcement.

Read more: Click hear