Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Monday ordered the setting up of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the encounter death of Akshay Shinde, the accused in the Badlapur school sexual assault case.
“This course of action is warranted in the interest of justice, to advance the cause of justice and to uphold public confidence in the justice delivery system. The same is necessitated, keeping in mind the adage ‘Justice must not only be done, but seen to be done,'” said Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale.
They directed the SIT to be constituted under the supervision of joint commissioner of police (crime) Lakhmi Gautam. He will form the SIT comprising officers of his choice from any department, and the team will be headed by a deputy commissioner of police. “If the selected officers are from different locations or departments, they shall be relieved of their current duties to enable their full participation in the investigation,” they directed.
In Aug 2024, Akshay was arrested for allegedly sexually assaulting two four-year-old girls at the school, where he was employed as a contractual sweeper. On Sept 23, 2024, he was killed in an alleged encounter while being taken from Taloja jail to Thane crime branch. The next day, an accidental death report (ADR) was filed. On his father’s petition for an SIT probe into Akshay’s ‘murder’, the HC expedited the magistrate’s inquiry. The magistrate’s Jan 17 report said use of force was not justified and held the five policemen responsible for his death. The state argued that it will register an FIR based on the state CID’s probe.
“Upon perusal of the (magistrate’s) inquiry report, we are satisfied that the case in question, the encounter, requires thorough investigation as it is undisputed that the deceased succumbed to the bullet injuries inflicted by a police officer when he was in police custody,” the judges said. They noted that despite Shinde’s parents expressing a desire to withdraw the petition, “we thought it appropriate to proceed with the same by appointing” an amicus curiae, senior advocate Manjula Rao.
“Closing the matter in the absence of their (parents’) absence would have been easy. But a constitutional court cannot ignore the state’s failure to fulfil its obligations,” they added.
The judges also mentioned that refusal to investigate a crime undermines the rule of law, erodes public faith in justice, and allows perpetrators to go unpunished. “The state’s reluctance to even register an FIR has left the petitioner and his wife feeling helpless, forcing them to forgo closure over their son’s untimely death. Such negligence weakens public trust in institutions and compromises the state’s legitimacy. As a constitutional court, we cannot permit this and be mute spectators,” they said.
They directed the state CID to hand over all papers related to the accidental death report (ADR) within two days to the joint CP. The SIT, after receiving the papers, shall take “appropriate steps in accordance with the law, promptly, having regard to what is observed here-in-above by us and in particular” the judgment in the Lalita Kumari case that mandates filing of an FIR where a cognisable offence is disclosed.
Special public prosecutor Amit Desai requested a two-week stay on the order to approach the Supreme Court. “For the reasons cited in the aforesaid order, the request for a stay is rejected,” they added.