03 October,2024 02:10 PM IST | Mumbai | mid-day online correspondent
Akshay Shinde. File pic
The Bombay High Court on Thursday directed the magistrate to submit by November 18 inquiry report into custodial death of Badlapur sexual assault case accused Akshay Shinde, reported the PTI.
"The report shall be placed before us on November 18. The magistrate inquiry report is expedited," the Bombay High Court said.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan gave the direction and also ordered that all evidence related to the case be collected, preserved and checked by forensic experts.
The bench also emphasized the police to include strong forensic evidence in its probe into the incident where the accused was killed in a police shoot-out.
ALSO READ
Mumbai woman defrauded of Rs 18 lakhs by conman posing as Army officer
Mumbai Police Cyber cell finds Dubai links in stock market scam
Mumbai: Man makes hoax bomb call to Haji Ali Dargah, demands Rs 10 cr; held
Dindoshi hit-and-run: Dumper driver, owner held for minor girl's death
Badlapur Encounter: Legal fallout and long-term impact of extra-judicial killing
The law mandates that every custodial death has to be inquired into by a magistrate.
Advocate General Birendra Saraf said all relevant documents have been forwarded to the magistrate for inquiry, as per the PTI.
The court said the magistrate shall commence the inquiry and hear all parties concerned.
The court was hearing a plea filed by the accused's father seeking a court-monitored probe into the death.
Akshay Shinde, 24, was facing allegations of sexually assaulting two minor girls at a school in Badlapur.
He was being transported Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai when the Badlapur encounter took place on September 23.
The incident happened near Mumbra Bypass in Thane when he allegedly snatched the gun of a policeman while he was being ferried in a police vehicle as part of a probe into a case registered against him on the complaint of his estranged wife.
As per the PTI, The Bombay High Court bench questioned the state CID, which is probing the matter, on its probe and urged that all evidence be collected, preserved and checked by forensic experts.
The bench asked if the police had collected forensic evidence from the body of the deceased.
The court said every firearm has a peculiar pattern and the residue it leaves is also different.
The residue left on the deceased's head where he was shot, his hands when he opened fire from the police's pistol needs to be collected, preserved and analysed forensically, it said.
"Dead body is the most silent and honest witness," the court said, asserting the need to collect and preserve all evidence, the PTI reported.
The court noted that bullets were fired from two different firearms in the incident.
"Empty shells found were of two different arms. The firing pin of every gun is different. This can be a conclusive proof which firing arm will have which firing pin," the court said, the news agency reported.
"We want to see a report showing this conclusively," it said.
The court also asked if it has found the bullet that pierced through the accused.
Birendra Saraf said that the bullet pierced through the tin roof of the police vehicle.
"How far did the bullet go? It was a secluded area. Did you not find it?" the court said, according to the PTI.
Birendra Saraf said that the CID would look into it, the PTI reported.
The court expressed its displeasure when it was informed that the police had not seized the bottle of water which was given to the accused when he asked for water in the vehicle, as per the PTI.
The police's case was that the accused's handcuffs were removed after he asked for water after which he forcibly snatched the pistol of one of the police officers and opened fire.
The court said in other cases, too, the police fails to gather evidence from the scene of offence.
"It is an important piece of evidence," the bench said.
The court also sought the medical report of the police officer who sustained injury in the firing by the deceased accused.
"The police officer who sustained gun shot injury...Has he been examined properly? Was there any residue or blackening at the spot? We need to see that. Was there entry and exit wound on the thigh of the police officer who got hurt?" the court asked, the news agency reported on Thursday.
"We need to see his injury certificate. The bullet injury must also be having some residue so as to correlate which gun's bullet hit him," it added.
The bench said each firearm has a peculiar firing pattern and a firing pin and hence forensic evidence is required.
(with PTI inputs)
