Guj: Undertrial dies in judicial custody, kin allege torture

A 35-year-old undertrial prisoner lodged at the Sabarmati Central Prison died in civil hospital here Monday while being in judicial custody on the charge of transporting hooch, officials said Tuesday.

However, family members of the deceased Sanjay Athwal claimed that he died due to torture by the police and jail authorities.

Police denied the charge, saying Athwal was a habitual drinker and died due to some ailment.

The Accidental Death Report (ADR) registered by Ranip police stated that Athwal was declared dead by the doctors of the civil hospital hours after he was admitted there by jail authorities Monday evening.

According to police, Athwal was unwell since he was brought to the jail on October 6 and received treatment at a hospital inside the jail premises for a day before he was shifted to the civil hospital.

"Athwal was arrested by Meghaninagar police in the city on October 5 on the charge of bootlegging. He was sent to the jail on order of a magistrate the next day," said Meghaninagar police inspector P G Sarvaiya.

However, Athwal's kin alleged that he was tortured by the Meghaninagar police and then by jail authorities.

"My brother was first tortured by Meghaninagar police and then by jail authorities. He was not suffering from any ailment. We have seen several marks of blows on his body. I will decide on lodging a complaint after receiving postmortem report," Dhiraj Athwal told PTI.

Ranip police inspector J G Patel said Athwal was a habitual drinker and died of some ailment.

"In the report sent to us, the doctors clearly said that Athwal died due to some ailment, as he was a habitual drinker. We have told Athwal's family members to wait for the PM report. If in case he was tortured, then it will reflect in that document," said Patel.

Meghaninagar police inspector Sarvaiya claimed that Athwal never complained about any torture when he was produced before the magistrate after his arrest on October 5.

"We caught him transporting 21 litres of hooch. He had been in jail on earlier occasions also on the charge of theft. We sent him to jail the next day after producing him before a magistrate. He had not complained about any torture by us during his production in court," he said.