Man Allegedly Given Electric Shock In Police Custody, Recorded Naked: P&H HC Seeks Response From SSP, Directs Formation Of Medical Board

Aiman J. Chishti

22 April 2025 9:05 PM IST

  • Man Allegedly Given Electric Shock In Police Custody, Recorded Naked: P&H HC Seeks Response From SSP, Directs Formation Of Medical Board

    Taking note of serious allegation of custodial violence and brutal torture, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has sought response from Punjab's Mohali Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and directed the PGIMER Chandigarh to from a medical board to examine the alleged injuries inflicted by Punjab Police.It was alleged that the a man was illegally detained, subjected to custodial torture,...

    Taking note of serious allegation of custodial violence and brutal torture, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has sought response from Punjab's Mohali Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and directed the PGIMER Chandigarh to from a medical board to examine the alleged injuries inflicted by Punjab Police.

    It was alleged that the a man was illegally detained, subjected to custodial torture, and was even given electric shocks. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the video of the petitioner in nude condition was also prepared in the police station and circulated.

    Justice Kirti Singh said, "The present case involves allegations of gross misconduct of the acting officials and in the opinion of this Court, requires a detailed response qua the chain of events as they unfolded in actuality as also qua the alleged custodial torture that the petitioner was allegedly subjected to. As such, the Senior Superintendent of the Police, Mohali is directed to do the needful and submit a proper and non-partisan response by way of an affidavit in the instant case."

    Considering the "serious allegations", the Court asked the "Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh to constitute a Medical Board for 24.04.2025 to thoroughly examine the petitioner for any bodily injuries stated to be inflicted on his person and submit a report qua the same prior to the next date of hearing."

    These observations were made while hearing the plea filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking protection of life and liberty of the petitioner and the setting aside of his arrest in FIR lodged on April 08 under sections 296, 74, 308 (2), 351 of the BNS and Section 66 of the IT Act and declaring the proceedings emanating therefore as non-est in law.

    Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner was forcefully abducted by unknown officials from outside a Gurudwara during the dusk of April 07 at around 7 pm, and illegally detained at Police Station Saneta, where he was allegedly subjected to custodial torture, and was even given electric shocks.

    The gruesome acts did not stop there and video of the petitioner in nude condition was also prepared and circulated. However, it was only on April 08, in furtherance of a premeditated plan, that the aforesaid FIR was registered to falsely implicate the petitioner, the counsel added

    It was further submitted that he was taken for his medical examination, which too was carried out in a shoddy manner just to feign compliance. 

    While dismissing the application for extension of police remand of the petitioner, the Trial Court noted, "the injuries inflicted on the petitioner, which were even visible to the naked eye" and directed to be examined by the Medical Board that the SMO, Civil Hospital was directed to constitute.

    The counsel submitted that the petitioner was not taken for his examination as ordered by the Trial Court on  11 April. Infact, he was taken back to the police station where he was allegedly threatened with dire consequences for himself and his family incase he chose to undergo a medical examination.

    Left with no other option, the petitioner had to give in to the demand when he was taken to the Civil Hospital on the noon of 12 April, where he was made to write his refusal for undergoing a medical, he added.

    It was also stated that at no point in time was the petitioner handed a copy of the arrest memo and FIR, and neither was he informed of his grounds of his arrest.

    The matter is now listed for April 29 "for awaiting the affidavit of the SSP, Mohali as also the report of the Medical Board."

    Mr. Bharat Bhandari, Advocate, Mr. Vinay Yadav, Advocate,

    Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate and Mr. Sushil K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner

    Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, Sr. DAG Punjab

    Title: ROHANI ALIAS RONI V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

    Click here to read/download the order 


    Next Story