Why is it necesary for the widow of M Krishknan to apply to the court to have another post-mortem to be conducted? The death in custody case of Krishnan certainly raised suspicions that he did not die of natural causes. And if he did die of natural causes then why is the police so hesitant in allowing for the autopsy to take place by another pathologists?
In view of the numerous cases of death in custody, there is always a strong suspicion that prisoners in remand are tortured and assaulted in order to extract information and confession. Therefore it is the inherent right of next of kin or relatives to seek a second opinion as to the properble cause of death. There has been precedent cases where the initial post-mortem did not reveal the actual cause of death. In Kugan case it was the second autopsy report which led to the policeman being charged with the homicide.
It is rather sad and inconceivable why bereaved family members have to resort to make court application in order to satisfy themselves that the deceased in police custody case did not die as a result of police brutality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment