Badlapur encounter: Bombay High Court wants magisterial probe expedited, seeks report by November 18

Mumbai: Observing that “dead body is the most silent and honest witness”, the Bombay High Court on Thursday sought to expedite the Magisterial probe into the encounter death of Akshay Shinde, the prime accused in the Badlapur sexual assault case, and sought a report by 18 November.

A division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising

Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Prithviraj Chavan asked for an inquiry report to be submitted on the next hearing scheduled for 18 November while it heard the petition of Akshay Shinde’s father Anna Shinde who had alleged that this son was killed in a “fake encounter” on 23 September.

"Law requires that when there is a custodial death, the investigation be conducted by the Magistrate. Let the investigation be conducted. We will wait for the report of the Magistrate," the court said.

It may be mentioned, the Eknath Shinde-led Maha Yuti government in Maharashtra has also initiated a Commission of Inquiry under Justice Dilip Bhosale (Retd), the former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, into the encounter killing amid demands from the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi.

The initial case after the encounter was registered by the Mumbra police station after which the Thane police set up a SIT to investigate which has not been taken over by the State-CID.

“The Magistrate shall commence the inquiry and hear all parties concerned…the report shall be placed before us on November 18. The magistrate inquiry report is expedited,” the Bombay High Court said and questioned the CID on its probe and urged that all evidence be collected, preserved and checked by forensic experts.

Advocate General Birendra Saraf informed the court that all relevant documents have been forwarded to the Magistrate for inquiry.

"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.

Going into the finer details, the court observed: “….a dead body is the most silent and honest witness…the 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 also sought the medical report of Assistant Police Inspector Nilesh More who sustained injuries. "Has he been examined properly? Was there any residue or blackening at the spot? We need to see that. Was there an entry and exit wound on the thigh of the police officer who got hurt? We need to see his injury certificate,” he said.