Addressing the inaction of Chhattisgarh State authorities in investigating a custodial death, the Supreme Court of India has transferred the investigation into the death of Shri Shravan Suryavanshi @ Sarvan Tamre to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta expressed grave concern over the failure of the State machinery to register a First Information Report (FIR) despite a judicial inquiry confirming that the deceased died due to injuries sustained in custody. The apex court set aside the inadequate relief granted by the High Court of Chhattisgarh and directed the State to immediately pay an interim compensation of Rs. 25,00,000 to the widow of the deceased.
Background of the Case
The deceased, Shravan Suryavanshi, was apprehended on January 18, 2024, by Head Constable Uma Shankar Rathore of Police Station Seepat, District Bilaspur, under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915. He was allegedly found in possession of 6 litres of raw Mahua liquor valued at Rs. 1,200. Following his arrest and remand, he was lodged at Central Jail, Bilaspur. On January 21, 2024, due to a deterioration in his health, he was shifted to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, where he passed away on January 22, 2024, at around 6:00 a.m.
While the jail’s initial medical report attributed the death to cardiopulmonary arrest with aspiration pneumonitis arising from alcoholic withdrawal and delirium tremens—making no mention of physical injuries—a subsequent post-mortem examination revealed six antemortem injuries:
- Bleeding from the tip of the penis.
- Laceration on the occipital scalp measuring 4 x 2 x 0.5 cm, accompanied by swelling and bleeding.
- Swelling with redness just above the right wrist.
- Swelling on both legs.
- A bluish-green/dark contusion on the outer side of the right thigh measuring 4 x 2 cm.
- A bluish-green/dark contusion on the back at the nape of the neck measuring 4 x 3 cm.
The post-mortem board concluded that the cause of death was cardio-respiratory arrest due to complications owing to a head injury caused by a hard and blunt object. The scalp injury was estimated to be within one day old, while other contusions were estimated to be 2 to 6 days old.
Following a request by the Jail Superintendent, a judicial inquiry was ordered under Section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, submitted an inquiry report on July 22, 2024, opining that the death appeared to have been caused due to complications arising from the head injury.
High Court Proceedings and Appeal
Despite the judicial inquiry report, no FIR was registered nor was any disciplinary action taken against the officers involved. The legal heirs—the widow, Lahra Bai Tamre, and her minor children—filed Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 76 of 2024 before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, seeking a direction to register a prosecution and demanding Rs. 50,00,000 in compensation.
By its judgment dated October 3, 2024, the Division Bench of the High Court acknowledged that the deceased died due to custodial violence and noted that compensation in public law for violation of fundamental rights serves as exemplary damages. However, the High Court awarded a sum of only Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation and failed to issue any directions for registering an FIR or investigating the officers responsible. Aggrieved by the inadequate compensation and the lack of investigative action, the petitioners approached the Supreme Court via Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 728 of 2026.
Arguments and Court’s Analysis
During the Supreme Court proceedings, senior officers of the State of Chhattisgarh—including the Principal Secretary (Home), the Director General of Police (DGP), and the Director General (Prisons)—appeared via video conference pursuant to court orders. Upon being questioned about the failure to register an FIR, the DGP asserted that because the police had not formally received the Section 176 CrPC judicial inquiry report, there was no occasion to register a criminal case.
The Supreme Court sharply rejected this reasoning, highlighting that the State had explicitly admitted in its reply before the High Court that a judicial inquiry had been instituted and its report was awaited. The Court observed that the medical report prepared at the jail was an attempt to mislead the inquiry, as it omitted all references to the severe head and body injuries later confirmed in the post-mortem.
Evaluating the conduct of the state authorities, the Supreme Court stated that the stance taken by top officials was sacrilegious and reflects a disturbing disregard of the statutory procedure governing custodial deaths.
Addressing the defence put forward by the State, the bench noted that the explanation was a cover-up story and an attempt to pull the wool over the Court’s eyes. The Court further remarked that the assertion by the DGP regarding the non-receipt of the report was patently false and wholly reprehensible.
The Court emphasized that given the age of the injuries, the possibility of the deceased sustaining multiple injuries over the period of his custody could not be ruled out, and immediate registration of an FIR was legally required.
Supreme Court Decision
Finding that the ends of justice required an independent investigation, the Supreme Court issued the following directives:
- CBI Probe: The Director, CBI, is directed to forthwith register a regular criminal case regarding the custodial death of Shri Shravan Suryavanshi and entrust the investigation to a senior officer for an expeditious probe. The investigation report must be placed before the Supreme Court on the next hearing date.
- Investigation of Official Conduct: The CBI investigation shall also examine the conduct of the concerned State officials in failing to take action after the submission of the judicial inquiry report.
- Record Transmission: The DGP, Chhattisgarh, must ensure complete case records are transmitted to the Director, CBI, via a special messenger within one week.
- Interim Compensation: The State of Chhattisgarh is directed to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 25,00,000 to Petitioner No. 1, Smt. Lahra Bai Tamre, within four weeks. The final quantum of compensation will be determined during subsequent hearings.
The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on October 13, 2026.
Case Details
Case Title: Lahra Bai Tamre & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.
Case No.: Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 728 of 2026
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Date: August 12, 2026
