The Thane Sessions Court recently stayed a paragraph in the Magistrate's Inquiry Report regarding the alleged encounter with Badlapur sexual assault case accused Akshay Shinde questioning the names of police officers and the validity of the alleged encounter. Hence, the police who have been held responsible for Akshay's encounter are now relieved.
The inquiry report of Akshay's encounter was submitted by the magistrate to the High Court on January 20. In it, Thane Crime Branch Senior Police Inspector Sanjay Shinde, Assistant Police Inspector Nilesh More, Constables Abhijit More, Harish Tawde and Khatal, who were taking Akshay from Taloja Jail to Kalyan, were held responsible for his custodial death. The police, through lawyers Sayaji Nangre and Suraj Nangre, approached the Thane Sessions Court to seek relief against the findings of the Magistrate's inquiry report. The sessions court, while hearing their application on February 21, adjourned paragraphs 81 and 82 of the inquiry report till further orders.
While being taken from Taloja to Kalyan, Akshay snatched the pistol from Assistant Police Inspector Nilesh More and opened fire. Hence, More also responded to Akshay's attack. Both Shinde and More were injured. However, the handcuffed Akshay could have been kept under control by the police. The magistrate questioned the encounter, concluding that their use of force was not justified. However, the police have claimed in their application in the Thane Sessions Court that the Magistrate went beyond their jurisdiction and reached a conclusion in the matter.
Also Read: Mumbai Police Arrests Accused After Twenty Years From Uttar Pradesh
According to Section 196 of the Indian Civil Security Code (BNSS), the Magistrate's inquiry was limited to determining the cause of death. Magistrates do not have the power to determine responsibility or question the actions of the police. The findings in paragraphs 76, 77, 79, 80, 81 and 82 of the report violate the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the police have also requested the Thane Sessions Court to exclude it.
Was the use of force justified in paragraph 81 of the inquiry report? Such a question has been raised. So, in paragraph 82 the claim of the police has been rejected by assuming forensic evidence. Also, it was concluded that the police were in a position to handle the situation easily. The magistrate had denied the authorities a copy of the report on the grounds of confidentiality. Later, the police approached the High Court. At that time, a bench of Justices Revathi Mohite-Dere and Neela Gokhale ordered them to provide a copy of the Magistrate's report.
The magistrate said in the report..
No gunshot residue was found on Akshay's hands or clothes. His fingerprints were also not found on the pistol he allegedly grabbed. Evidence presented showed that Police Officer More was shot in the thigh from a distance of more than three feet. Therefore, the claim that there was a fight between him and Akshay cannot be accepted. Bullet holes were found at several places in the vehicle involved in the encounter. Therefore, the Magistrate questioned the sequence of events narrated by the police regarding the encounter in the inquiry report.
Share
Tweet
