1 CGHC010220652023 2026:CGHC:34627 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3224 of 2023 Duloreen Bai W/o. Late Sunder Lal Sahu, Aged About 64 Years R/o. Kududand, Matachoura, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary, Department Of Home (Jail) D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Inspector General, Jail, Police Head Quarters Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Superintendent, Central Jail Bilaspur, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Superintendent Of Police, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Officer Incharge, Police Station Civil Lines Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Vidhi Matlani, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For State-Respondents : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 06/08/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following prayer(s) :- 2 "10.1 In view of the above and in the interests of justice, it is most respectfully prayed by the petitioner that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to: a.) To call entire records of the case from respondent authorities to pertaining the present case. b.) Issue Direction that the respondent no.1 may constitute an independent committee and permit the petitioner to approach the committee with all the relevant materials. c.) To Issue Direction to respondent state to provide just and proper compensation to the petitioner in lieu of the custodial death of the petitioner's husband namely (Sunder LalSahu, age 66 years) in Central Jail Bilaspur in the interest of justice. 10.2 To grant any other relief which may suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be allowed. 10.3 Cost of the petition may kindly award to the petitioner.” 2. By virtue of the instant petition the petitioner is not challenging any particular order/orders, but wants to seek order or direction, for respondents to conduct a fair inquiry regarding custodial death of prisoner i.e. petitioner's husband namely Late Sunder Lal Sahu, aged 66 years and the petitioner herein claimed that investigation to be carried out by the High Power Committee or by the Central Bureau of Investigation any competent authority and to provide just and proper 3 compensation to the petitioner in lieu of the custodial death of the petitioner's husband namely (Sunder Lal Sahu). Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner who is wife of Late Sundar Lal Sahu has filed this petition while stating during the course of custody, husband of the petitioner has expired. According to the counsel, the deceased was hale and hearty, however due to incarceration, the police authorities have not treated the husband of the petitioner appropriately and as such the petitioner died and therefore, the petition be allowed to pay compensation to the petitioner and enquiry is required to be initiated regarding suspicious death of the husband of petitioner and the petitioner is also required for grant of compensation as the death of the deceased is unnatural and the respondent authorities are under obligation to state the reasons of the death. She further submits that the petitioner was implicated along with his sons and wife (petitioner) and the said case was prosecuted in accordance with law and the accused persons were acquitted in the said case and as such the petitioner is entitled for compensation on account of the death of petitioner’s husband in custody. 4. Learned State counsel opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the prisoner- Sunder Lal Sahu was medically fit at the time of his transfer to jail and was not suffering from any illness. Subsequently, his health deteriorated seriously. It is further submitted that, as per the Inquiry Report dated 4 22.03.2023 of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (City), Raipur, based on the opinion of the post-mortem examiner, the deceased died due to hepatic encephalopathy resulting from carcinoma of the head of the pancreas. The deceased had been admitted to the Cancer Department on 24.04.2022 in a critical condition with advanced jaundice. Although he was referred for PTBD (stent) insertion, the procedure could not be performed due to his extremely serious condition. The post-mortem report confirms that the cause of death was hepatic encephalopathy caused by pancreatic cancer. He further submitted that the death of the Sundar Lal Sahu was natural and the police authorities or jail authorities are not nexus of the deceased and as such relief of the petitioner cannot be withheld. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the each and every aspect of the matter and perused the records in which according to petitioner, the co-accused persons have been acquitted from all the charges and for that ground, husband of the petitioner was behind the bars in which he died under alleged suspicious condition and further this Court finds that the Inquiry Report dated 22.03.2023 as well as the post-mortem report consistently conclude that the deceased died due to hepatic encephalopathy caused by carcinoma of the head of the pancreas. There is no material on record to establish that the death 5 occurred on account of any negligence, omission, or deliberate act attributable to the jail or police authorities. The medical records indicate that the deceased was suffering from an advanced stage of pancreatic cancer and was provided medical treatment after his condition deteriorated. Merely because the death occurred during judicial custody, it cannot, in the absence of cogent evidence, be presumed that the authorities were responsible for the same. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has failed to make out any case warranting interference or grant of the reliefs prayed for. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merits, is dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vasant