Karnataka High Court
Smt Surekha W/O. Ramchandra Hugar Alias ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 March, 2024
Author: Ravi V.Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087
WP No. 101477 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
WRIT PETITION NO.101477 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SUREKHA
W/O. RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. NEAR LAXMI TEMPLE,
KALIGUDDI VILLAGE,
TALUK: GOKAK,
DIST: BELAGAVI-591227.
2. SMT. MEENAKSHI
W/O. BALAKRISHNA HUGAR @ GURAV,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. NEAR LAXMI TEMPLE,
KALIGUDDI VILLAGE,
TALUK: GOKAK,
DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591227.
3. SHRI RAGHUNATH
S/O. RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. NEAR LAXMI TEMPLE,
VIJAYALAXMI KALIGUDDI VILLAGE,
M BHAT
TALUK: GOKAK,
Digitally signed by
VIJAYALAXMI M BHAT
DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591227.
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
...PETITIONERS
Date: 2024.03.26
15:02:19 +0530
(BY SRI SANTOSH PUJARI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
BELAGAVI, SUBHASH NAGAR,
BELAGAVI-590010.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087
WP No. 101477 of 2024
3. THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR,
KULGOD POLICE STATION,
TALUK: GOKAK,
BELAGAVI-591307.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BELAGAVI, COURT COMPOUND,
BELAGAVI-590001.
5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BAILHONGAL SUB DIVISION,
DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591102.
6. THE TAHASHILDAR GOKAK,
TALUK: GOKAK,
DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591307.
7. THE MEDICAL DIRECTOR,
BELAGAVI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL
SCIENCE BELAGAVI,
KARNATAKA (BIMS HOSPITAL),
B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BELAGAVI-590001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI GANGADHAR J.M., AAG FOR R1 TO R6;
R7 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN
THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTIONS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONDUCT SECOND/RE
POSTMORTEM OF THE DECEASED SHRI BALKRISHNA S/O
RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV BY EXHUMING THE BODY OF
DECEASED SHRI BALKRISHNA S/O RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV
FROM KALLIGUDI VILLAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY
ACCEPTING THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 26/02/2024 VIDE
ANNEXURE-D AND D1 AND THEREBY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO
VIDE RECORD/VIDEOGRAPHY THE ENTIRE POSTMORTEM AS PER THE
LAW MORE PARTICULARLY AS DETAILED IN ANNEXURE-E; ISSUE A
WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR
DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO
PHOTOGRAPH/VIDEOGRAPHY OF THE ENTIRE BODY OF THE
DECEASED SHRI BALKRISHNA S/O RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV
DURING EXHUMATION AND BEFORE CONDUCTING SECOND/REPOST
MORTEM OF THE DECEASED SHRI BALKRISHNA S/O RAMCHANDRA
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087
WP No. 101477 of 2024
HUGAR @ GURAV; ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR
ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS
TO CONDUCT SECOND/RE POSTMORTEM OF THE DECEASED SHRI
BALKRISHNA S/O RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV BY FORMING A
TEAM OF 3 FORENSIC EXPERTS (FORENSIC DOCTORS) AT BELAGAVI
INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE BELAGAVI KARNATAKA; ISSUE A
WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR
DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONDUCT
SECOND/RE POSTMORTEM OF THE DECEASED SHRI BALAKRISHNA
S/O RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV IN THE PRESENCE OF ONE
FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE PETITIONERS OR IN PRESENCE OF ANY
ONE MEMBER NOMINATED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT; ISSUE A WRIT
IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR
DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO TAKE X-RAYS OF
THE ENTIRE BODY OF THE DECEASED SHRI BALAKRISHNA S/O
RAMCHANDRA HUGAR @ GURAV AND PRESERVE THE SAID X-RAY
AND SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL COPIES TO THIS HON'BLE COURT;
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT
OR DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO HANDOVER A
SOFT COPIES OF VIDEOS, PHOTOS AND X-RAYS TAKEN DURING THE
EXHUMATION, DURING SECOND POSTMORTEM OF DECEASED
BALAKRISHNA TO THE PETITIONERS WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME
PERIOD.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking for following reliefs:
a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or directions directing the respondents to conduct second/re postmortem of the deceased Shri Balkrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav by exhuming the body of deceased Shri Balkrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav from Kalligudi village in accordance with law by accepting the communication dtd. 26/02/2024 vide Annexure-D and D1 and thereby direct the respondents to vide record/videography the entire postmortem as per the law more particularly as detailed in Annexure-E;-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 b. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or directions directing the respondents to photograph/videography of the entire body of the deceased Shri Balkrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav during exhumation and before conducting second/repost mortem of the deceased Shri Balkrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav;
c. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or directions directing the respondents to conduct second/re postmortem of the deceased Shri Balkrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav by forming a team of 3 forensic experts (forensic doctors) at Belagavi Institute of Medical Science Belagavi Karnataka;
d. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or directions directing the respondents to conduct second/re postmortem of the deceased Shri Balakrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav in the presence of one family members of the petitioners or in presence of any one member nominated by this Hon'ble Court;
e. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or directions directing the respondents to take x- rays of the entire body of the deceased Shri Balakrishna s/o Ramchandra Hugar @ Gurav and preserve the said x-ray and submit the original copies to this Hon'ble Court;
f. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or directions directing the respondents to handover a soft copies of videos, photos and x-rays taken during the exhumation, during second postmortem of deceased Balakrishna to the petitioners within a reasonable time period.
2. Sri Santosh Pujari, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners were mother, wife and brother of late Sri Balakrishna Son of Ramachandra Hugar @ Gurav (referred as 'Balakrishna' for brevity). It -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 was submitted that on 13.02.2024, when Balakrishna was attending Lakshmi Devi Jatra at Kalliguddi village, Gokak Taluk, along with his family members, he was assaulted by a group of 20 - 30 members, causing blunt injuries and trauma over all parts of his body. According to petitioners, attack was on ground that they were only family belonging to different caste and owned 20 acres of irrigated land with borewell.
3. It was submitted that petitioners had approached respondent no.3-Police Sub-Inspector, Kulgod Police Station, Gokak Taluk. Even after respondent no.2 issued direction on 15.02.2024, he did not register complaint. Thereafter, Balakrishna took treatment at BIMS Hospital as 'MLC' case and ultrasound report of abdomen was also obtained. On 16.02.2024 when petitioners once again approached respondent no.3, he exhibited hostile attitude on ground that another group was ready to file compliant against deceased. Under such circumstances, fearing for his life, Balakrishna did not get himself -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 admitted at hospital and got himself discharged on 15.02.2024 and went to maternal home of his wife at Rabakavi, on 17.02.2024.
4. But, on 18.02.2024, Balakrishna died. Only thereafter, that too as per instructions of respondent no.2, respondent no.3 registered FIR and got post-mortem examination ('PME' for short) conducted at BIMS, Belagavi on 19.02.2024. Thereafter, Balakrishna was cremated as per family rituals at Kalliguddi.
5. After receipt of postmortem report, respondent no.3 began floating a theory that Balakrishna died of electrocution, apparently with a view to protect real culprits. It was submitted that on 18.02.2024, when Balakrishna fell ill, he was taken to Banahatti hospital on motorcycle due to lack of transport facilities. At that time, he had sustained injuries on his big toes. But, his death was solely due to injuries sustained in attack on 13.02.2024. It was submitted failure to get videograph of entire PM session led petitioners to suspect foul play on -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 part of respondent no.3 to shield real culprits. It was submitted as per recognized medical journals, there was possibility of electrocution injuries being created even after death. It was in above circumstances that petitioners were seeking for conduct of second PME by exhuming body of Balakrishna.
6. It was submitted that insofar as exhuming of body for conduct of second PME, High Court of Madras in case of Santosh Vs. District Collector and Ors.,1 , had held it permissible. Likewise, even High Court of Andra Pradesh in Geddam Bullayya Vs. State of Andra Pradesh2, had also held where death was under
suspicious circumstances, conduct of second PME would be justified. Learned counsel for petitioner also sought to rely upon decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhupinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab3, wherein Apex Court had set aside order of High Court of Punjab and Haryana rejecting request for second PME and remanded it. Thereafter, 1 2020 SCC OnLine Madras 5541 2 2020 SCC OnLine AP 661, 3 2021 SCC OnLine SC 555 -8- NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 learned Single Judge of High Court of Punjab had ordered for conduct of second PME.
7. In view of above facts and circumstances, and since investigation carried out by respondent no.3 did not appear to be balanced and proper, conduct of second PME was necessary before its viability would be lost.
8. On other hand, Sri Gangadhar J.M., learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents -
State sought to oppose writ petition. At outset, it was submitted, petition was not maintainable. It was submitted, grievance of petitioners cannot be considered by this Court, when investigation was still in progress.
9. It was submitted first PME was done by an experienced doctor and therefore, without pointing out any irregularity with same, prayer for second PME would not maintainable. It was further submitted that prayer for second PME cannot be granted under writ jurisdiction, especially, prior to submission of final report before -9- NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 Magistrate, before whom, such application could be filed under Section 176(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
10. It was further submitted that vital organs were already sent for FSL report and cause of death could be asserted only after receipt of FSL report. It was also submitted, since more than 19 days had lapsed after burial, body of deceased would already be in advanced stage of decomposition and no useful purpose would be served.
11. Insofar as apprehension/allegation that PME was conducted as per directions of Investigating Officer ('I.O.' for short) which was likely to cover up truth to protect real culprits etc., it was submitted that doctors conducting PME are not instructed by I.O. and as per procedure, it is conducted from all angles. Further, fact that brother-in-law of deceased had signed inquest panchanama which would show death was due to electrocution would also allay aspersions cast against I.O.
In support of his submission, reliance was placed on
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Mohammad Latief Margrey Vs. The Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & others4.
12. In reply, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner no.2-wife of deceased Balakrishna was very much present at time of his death and asserted that death was not due to electrocution, especially, nearby spot as there were no electric cable.
Therefore, concerns about faulty investigation leading to real criminals being acquitted were substantiated. Hence, sought for allowing petition.
13. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition record.
14. From above, it appears that Balakrishna was assaulted by innumerable persons on 13.02.2024, while he was attending Laxmi Devi Fair at Kalliguddi village, along with family members and died on 18.02.2024 at Rabakavi 4 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1203
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 village. As per complaint by petitioners, that death of Balakrishna was due to injuries sustained in assault, Kulgod Town Police had registered FIR in Crime no.17/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 354(B), 302 and 149 of Indian Penal Code.
Thereafter, body was sent for PME and preliminary report submitted.
15. While petitioners allege that by showing cause of death as due to electrocution, there was attempt to derail investigation to shield culprits and therefore, second PME to specifically ascertain whether death was due to electrocution or due to injuries sustained in assault was very much necessary, as same could not be conducted later and PME report would form an important technical documentary material to establish charges and therefore second PME was necessary by exhuming body.
16. On other hand, respondents deny allegation of faulty investigation and PME by contending that both investigation and PME were conducted from all angles and
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 cause of death could be determined only after receipt of FSL reports, therefore exhumation and second PME, was not necessary.
17. Wherefore, instant matter involves two important aspects. Firstly, about exhumation and secondly, need for second PME. As per decision of Apex Court in Mohammad Latief Margrey's case (supra) after a body has been buried, it is considered to be in custody of law; therefore, disinterment is not a matter of right.
Disturbance or removal of an interred body is subject to control and discretion of Court. It further held a Court will not ordinarily order or permit a body to be disinterred unless there is a strong showing of necessity and each case is required to be looked at in own peculiar facts and circumstances.
18. Special circumstances sought to be made out in instant case are, firstly, reluctance of respondent no.3 to register FIR and subsequent conduct indicating shoddy investigation; secondly, though there were no electrical
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 connections/wires near place of death of Balakrishna, conducting panchanama and seizure of electrical wires leading to suspicion about attempt to derail fair investigation; thirdly, absence of any injuries normally associated with electrocution (by referring to certain Medical Journals) coupled with possibility of subjecting body of Balakrishna to electric shock after his death to show electrocution as cause of death; fourthly, failure to make any arrests even after registering complaint for offence under Section 302 of IPC and lastly, failure to video-graph PME and also failure to inform petitioners about such an option.
19. Insofar as reliance placed on decisions, it is seen that High Court of Madras in Santosh's case (supra) was dealing with allegations of custodial death, and taking note of fact that PME was conducted by doctors, who did not have Masters Degree in Forensic Medicine and failure to videograph PME, High Court ordered for conduct of second PME. While disposing of said matter, Court also
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 issued general guidelines to be followed at time of conducting PME in case of custodial deaths.
20. In Geddam Bullayya's case (supra), High Court of Andra Pradesh was dealing with suspicious death of a teenager in open field without any clothes and report of FSL was inconclusive as to cause of death. Under said circumstances, there was an order for conducting of second PME.
21. In Bhupinder Singh's case (supra), first PME was conducted in State of West Bengal, under circumstances wherein it was stated that body was lying at his place for almost nine days, and alleged to be in police encounter, and body was handed over to Punjab Police after PME, High Court of Punjab and Haryana had ordered for second PME to be conducted in Punjab to know whether death was due to police encounter.
22. In instant case, though there is allegation that Balakrishna died due to injuries sustained in assault by 20-
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 30 persons, fact that deceased was taken to BIMS hospital for treatment, wherein some medical investigation about internal injuries sustained by deceased is stated to have been conducted prior to his discharge and death on 18.02.2024 being more than five days after alleged assault that took place on 13.02.2024 would not give room for a strong case of suspicion.
23. Perusal of photographs of body of Balakrishna prior to PME, available in file of I.O. prima facie do not appear to substantiate case of suspicion sought to be made out by petitioners.
24. On other hand, fact that during course of hearing, it was revealed by respondents that doctor, who conducted PME was fully qualified and had taken photographs while conducting PME for academic purposes on his personal mobile phone and had agreed to make said photographs part of investigation. Details of said photographs were provided as under:
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087
WP No. 101477 of 2024
i) Photo of left big toe with foot.
ii) Photo of left (II) toe with foot.
iii) Photo of right big toe.
iv) Photo of right big toe with plantar setback (sic)
of foot.
v) Photo of heart with pericardial.
25. And that vital parts of body were sent for CE/HPE i.e. Chemical/Histo-Pathological Analysis to Forensic Laboratory, which would help in revealing cause of death, as also assurance by learned AAG, that investigation would be conducted in fair and objective manner covering all aspects to determine actual cause of death, are factors that weigh down against allegations/apprehensions of petitioners.
26. Insofar as circumstances, under which second PME could be conducted. High Court of Madras in L Ramalakshmi Vs. Principal Secretary and Others5, has observed at para-7 as follows:5
2021 SCC OnLine Mad 6244
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 "7. .................... Re-postmortem cannot be ordered for the asking. The person demanding a second postmortem must make out a case therefor. He must catalogue the omissions and defects in the first postmortem. The conscience of the court must be satisfied that there is a need for a second postmortem for the purpose of arriving at the truth. Minor infractions of procedure will not impel the court to order re-postmortem. The issue must go to the root of the matter. Something fundamental must have happened to shock the court's conscience."
27. In instant case, though, petitioners have probablised case of suspicion, same are not of such gravity as to shock Court's conscience or establish a strong case of necessity for ordering second PME.
28. It would suffice to direct investigation to be conducted under supervision of a responsible Officers namely respondent no.2 in this case and direct I.O. to request FSL to preserve samples or organs sent for testing, for further analysis or testing, if need arises after receipt of report. Liberty is also reserved to approach, jurisdictional Magistrate, in case any further directions or clarifications are necessary.
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024
29. Considering fact that present situation is likely to recur in many cases, and scientific investigation is amongst most effective tools in quest of truth/administration of justice, it is deemed necessary to direct State Government to consider adopting measures suggested in Santosh's case (supra) for conducting of PMEs in State of Karnataka, not only in cases of custodial death, but also in other cases, with suitable modifications:
"(i) The Judicial Magistrate conducting the enquiry under Section 176(1)(A) Cr.P.C. shall ensure that the family of the deceased or its representatives are given access to see the body both front and back and are also allowed to take video and photos.
(ii) No autopsy shall take place or commence without the next of kin having seen the body.
Of course, if the family of the deceased refuses to see the body, even after so being permitted by the concerned Judicial Magistrate conducting the enquiry, the Judicial Magistrate can, in writing, permit the conducting of postmortem.
(iii) The autopsy shall be carried out by a team of two doctors who have a master's degree in forensic medicine and are attached to a Medical College and Hospital in the State. In other words, what is called as forensic autopsy must be conducted.
(iv) The autopsy shall be done by adhering to the norms laid down by the Hon'ble Division
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 Bench in V. Eswaran v. Government Of Tamil Nadu, dated 16.04.2019 in W.P. No. 10694 of 2019 and in W.P. (MD) No. 78 of 2019, dated 28.09.2020.
(v) The whole body shall be x-rayed in order to find out if there are any fractures. The entire autopsy should be videographed from the start of the examination till its completion by adhering to the following six phases set out in Modi 'a Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology' 26th Edition edited by Justice K. Kannan. For easy reference, the same is extracted as under:--
"Procedure for Autopsy in Custodial Deaths.- The National Human Rights Commission has recommended video recording of the autopsy, in cases of custody deaths. Circulars directing the police to do this recording have been issued by many State governments like Gujarat and Tamil Nadu.
In Tamil Nadu, in order to minimise the speculation that medical officers are being influenced by the police authorities, post- mortem of victims of custodial violence is conducted by a team of two or more medical experts within 24 hours of the death of the victim.
Only forensic medicine experts at the teaching hospitals of government medical colleges should do autopsies of all custodial victims where the departments of forensic medicine are present. When the autopsy is conducted in district or taluk government hospitals, efforts should be made to include a forensic medicine expert from the nearest teaching hospital."
Phases of Videography Phase I.-- The bearings of the dead body, like clothes, should be videographed individually with more focus on striking features like stains, cuts or holes on relevant material.
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 Phase II.--
1. Front view of the dead body on the autopsy table before wiping and after wiping the dead body.
2. The same process should be repeated with the back of the dead body.
3. The conjunctiva and lips should be videographed for the presence of any haemorrhagic spots.
Phase III.-- External Injuries
1. These injuries should be recorded according to one's own practice, i.e., beginning with head and neck, trunk, upper and lower (right and left) extremities (front and back and sides of the body) are the commonest way of recording.
2. Each injury should be serially numbered by number tags (adherent labels).
3. The videography should be taken in parts or as whole as the videographer feels fit to produce the images with clarity.
4. Each external wound need not be individually videographed, because all these injuries are tagged and covered by the above process.
5. Any suspected areas of fractured bones of the limbs should be exposed and videographed.
Phase IV.-- The actual dissection for exposing the body cavities need not be videographed in order to avoid the lengthiness of the cassette and to keep the viewers live to the bare facts of trauma. It is a good practice to begin the autopsy with the exposure and removal of the brain.
Phase V-- The scalp should be dissected up to the eyebrows on the front and below the mastoids on the back. The inner surface of the anterior and
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 posterior flaps should be videographed separately, followed by the videography of the exposed cranial surface.
The removed vault of the skull should be videographed by stretching it in the sagittal - plane and in the coronal plane. This procedure will expose all types of fracture, if any. The extradural space should be videographed in situ followed by subdural space. If there is subdural haemorrhage, it should be removed and videographed again to confirm subdural haemorrhage and for the presence of subarachnoid haemorrhage.
The brain is removed and placed on its vault to expose the basal surface. This exposed surface should be videographed. The circle of Willis dissected out and exposed in situ. This should be videographed again. Then it is turned to rest on its base and videographed again.
Each stage of the brain dissection should be exposed and videographed to its finale according to one's methodology of brain dissection. The base of the skull, along with the meninges, should be videographed before and after wiping its surface. The basal meninges should be stripped out.
The stretch force is applied to the base of the skull in the sagittal and corona' planes and videographed in each plane to expose any type of fracture.
Phase VI --Chin to pubic symphysis dissection is continued to expose the abdominal cavity. The neck and the chest wall are dissected to their extreme sides to expose the front as wide as possible. This widely exposed neck and the chest wall should be videographed.
The cupped palm should be dipped gently into the pelvic cavity and raised. If there is blood, it will be seen in the palm. If the palm is empty, then there is no blood in the pelvic cavity, which excludes bleeding injury to the visceral organs of the abdomen. The entire manoeuvre of dipping
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 and raising the hand should be videographed consecutively.
Then the removed sternum should be bent in both the planes to expose any fracture. This process should be videographed.
The hand manoeuvre done in the pelvic cavity should be done to rule out any bleeding injury for right and left pleural cavity with consecutive videography of the procedure.
The pericardium with the heart in situ should be videographed. The heart is exposed in situ and videographed before and after wiping the pericardial sac.
(iv) Neck.--The superficial muscles of the neck should be exposed and videographed. Then the superficial muscles of the neck are removed with little dissection of the deep muscles. This will partly expose the hyoid bone.
The hybid bone is examined in situ by slight adduction and abduction of the greater horns of the hyoid bone. This manoeuvre should be. videographed as it explicitly conveys that the hyoid bone was properly examined for any fractures in the greater horn. This manoeuvre will show inward or outward compression fractures, if present.
The deep muscles are removed to expose the larynx, submandibular glands and thyroid glands. The exposed surface should be videographed. Evisceration Process.--Evisceration is done from the tongue down to the rectum. The body cavities should be cleaned and later videographed.
The anterior chest wall should be pressed backwards on each side separately. If there is yielding, it indicates fracture of the ribs and that area alone should be videographed. The aorta should be opened before the visceral organs are separated. The intima of aorta should be videographed.
The posterior surface of pharynx and the oesophagus should be videographed for the presence of blood or no blood.
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 The oesophagus is opened up to its cardiac end and videographed. The larynx and trachea should be opened and videographed.
(v) Heart--The heart should be dissected.
1. Inflow--chambers should be exposed and videographed.
2. Outflow--pulmonary and aortic valves are exposed and videographed.
3. Coronary arteries should be dissected as far as possible. Videography is done before sectioning and after serial sections to explore any block in them. The area of block should be isolated and videographed again.
(III) Visceral Organs.--Each organ should be separated and the separated organ should be videographed. After sectioning, each organ should again be videographed. The process of sectioning by the dissector need not be videographed.
In the case of kidneys, the process of stripping the capsule should be videographed. Scrotum--through the midline incision the testes are exposed and videographed.
To Expose Deep Contusions of the Limbs.-- In fair skinned people, abnormal discolorations of the skin should be cut and exposed and videographed. In dark skinned people through one long incision on the front and back on each limb should be made to exclude any extravasations of blood in the muscular tissue. Multiple parallel incisions can be put in the sole and palm. These should be videographed.
Norms to be followed for the Videography
1. Essential elements in the videography
(a) Videograph is a visual document, not a news report or a chat show, and therefore the
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 coverage should be comprehensive and detailed.
(b) Memory. chip (in case of digital recording) Nideo cassette is to be used as corroborative evidence. Therefore, visual gimmicks and bias should be avoided.
(c) Memory chip/Video cassette is to be preserved as a source for future reference. Therefore, professionalism should be maintained while recording and an unedited version should be provided.
(d) During the videography of autopsy in custodial deaths, the date and time button should be pressed so that the date and time will automatically be superimposed.
(e) The context of the videography should be established by mixing appropriate combination of wide-angle shot, panning and tilting.
(f) While highlighting details, continuity should be ensured by using zoom in and zoom out without cutting. It is suggested to limit the details viz., the contusions and incisions to eye-level shot and to use ped-up/down if necessary; however, high/low angles should not be used.
(g) Complicated lighting should be avoided. It is advisable to light the subject fully if the ambient light is not sufficient. When lighting is poor, use of manual mode to focus is suggested.
(h) It is necessary to use the normal lens in general and to avoid use of filters. However, before any recording the auto white balance button should be used.
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024
(i) It is suggested to use the tripod during videography of autopsy.
(j) Each injury, whole and cut internal organs should be videographed for a minimum of ten seconds.
Procedure for Autopsy in Custodial Victims a. The bearings of the dead body should be videographed separately.
b. The face should be videographed for the presence of haemorrhagic spots in the eyes and the lips'.
c. All external injuries should be serially numbered with adherent tags and videographed at the technical option of the videographer as a whole or in parts.
d. The actual process of dissection for exposing the three body cavities need not be videographed.
e. The hyoid bone should be exposed in situ.
f. The internal organs should be separated and video-graphed before and after sectioning of each organ. The actual process of separation and sectioning by the dissector need not be videographed.
g. Both the testes must be exposed and videographed.
h. Suspected fracture sites should be exposed and videographed.
i. In fair skinned people, the discolored skin site alone should be cut and exposed and videographed. In dark skinned people, one long incision on the front and the back of each limb should be made to exclude any
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 internal contusion. The exposed surfaces should be videographed.
2. Custody of the memory chip/videocassette
(a) Immediately after the videography of the autopsy is completed, the essential details relating to the case such as name of the deceased; general particulars of the deceased, particulars of requisition of autopsy etc., should be recorded on the video.
(b) Thereafter, the forensic medicine expert conducting the autopsy should ensure immediate sealing of the memory chip/video cassette and its immediate dispatch with all required particulars to the inquest authority, who in turn should send it to the National Human Rights Commission."
vi) The autopsy report should be prepared expeditiously and handed over to the investigating officer in the case so that the filing of the final report is not delayed. A copy of the autopsy report as well as video should be simultaneously given to the legal heir or representatives of the family of the deceased. This alone will enable them to take recourse to legal remedies immediately. If after receipt of the autopsy report, the legal heir/representatives of the deceased family give in writing that they intend to move the High Court, the body shall be preserved in the mortuary for atleast 48 hours. If the body is disposed of either by cremation or otherwise in the meanwhile, the very purpose of holding a second postmortem will be rendered infructuous. All of us know that hasty cremation in the tragic Hathras gang rape case led to controversy. It is in the interest of the police to take the family of the deceased into confidence and avoid rushing things through. They are stakeholders in the process and the police have to treat them accordingly.
- 27 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024
30. For aforesaid reasons, writ petition is disposed of by issuing following directions:
i. Prayer for second Post-Mortem Examination of deceased Balakrishna is rejected.
ii. However, it is ordered that investigation of Crime no.17/2024 registered by Kulgod Police Station, Gokak shall be carried on under supervision of respondent no.2.
iii. Investigating Officer shall secure photographs taken by doctor who conducted PME of deceased Balakrishna as per details mentioned in para - 24 above and make them part of investigation. He is also directed to conduct investigation to ascertain actual cause of death of Balakrishna, as far as possible, from all angles.
iv. Pending conclusion of investigation, I.O. shall and ensure that FSL preserves Test samples of deceased Balakrishna sent for Chemical and Histo-Pathological Analysis, for atleast four months, after submission of analysis report by FSL. A copy of report shall be made available to petitioners herein.
- 28 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:5087 WP No. 101477 of 2024 v. Copy of this order shall be sent to Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Government of Karnataka, for considering adoption of or issuing suitable guidelines for conduct of effective Post-Mortem Examinations.
Sd/-
JUDGE vmb List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36