'Not Fair & Impartial' : Supreme Court Slams Police Probe In Unnao Custodial Death Case; Orders Further Investigation By IG Level Officer

The Court directed the State to hand over all the papers to the Senior Police Officer within 7 days from the date of order. Directions were also issued to furnish the report within a period of eight weeks.

"We have an option either to send the matter to CBI for further re-investigation, but after we have heard counsel for the parties, consider it appropriate at this stage that let a senior Police Officer, Shri Bhagwan Swarup, Inspector General of Police, Intelligence, HQ, Lucknow shall personally undertake further investigation of the complaint made by the petitioner on which FIR No.160 of 2021 has been registered, in a fair and impartial manner and report be furnished to this Court within a period of eight weeks," the bench said in its order.

A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi passed the order in a petition filed by Nasima, mother of the deceased. She approached the Supreme Court challenging the refusal of the Allahabad High Court to hand over the investigation to  CBI or any other independent agency.

From the beginning, the complainant(the mother) was contending that her complaint was against the local police officials who were present in the police station Bangermau, under whose custody her son was brutally murdered. It was also her contention that the investigation which was undertaken by the Circle Officer attached to the Police Station Bangermau, District Unnao, would not be fair and transparent, but the administration had not paid any heed to her request.

She had further argued that just after recording the statements of the police personnel of the police station, hardly any statement of independent witness being recorded, a charge-sheet was filed against Constable Vijay Chaudhary and Home Guard Satya Prakash under Section 304 IPC on 6th August, 2021.

For a fair and transparent investigation with regards to the FIR, the complainant had approached the Allahabad High Court praying for transferring the investigation to either CBI or some other independent agency.

"Remaining completely obvious of her complaint, the High Court after taking note of the fact that since charge-sheet has been filed u/s 304 IPC, the High Court on September 21, 2021 disposed of the petition by remarking that it was for the prosecution to invoke Section 319 of the Code to summon additional accused for trial if considered necessary", the Supreme Court noted in the order.

The Court extracted the 14 ante-mortem injuries recorded in the post-mortem report, which included injuries to skull.

The Court had earlier directed the State to file a complete charge sheet on the basis of which charge under Sections 302/34 IPC has been framed and also stayed further proceedings in Sessions Trial No.1059/2021 titled State vs. Satya Prakash & Ors. pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Unnao.

The Top Court, after considering the statements recorded u/s 161 by the investigating officer, said that no one has supported the case of the prosecution, but the charge-sheet was filed under Section 304 IPC and the learned Sessions Judge has framed charges later under Section 302/34 IPC.

"We have not been able to endorse our satisfaction of a fair and independent investigation and the manner in which the investigation has been conducted by the Circle Officer of the police Station under whose jurisdiction the charge-sheet came to be filed on the basis of the charges later been framed under Section 302 IPC on 2nd December, 2021," the bench said.

"The fair investigation is the backbone of the criminal justice system and the object of the investigation is to search for the truth so that it would help in meeting the ends of justice by way of fair trial in Court. At the same time, the need to ensure fair investigation of crime is undoubtedly imperative because it protects at one level the rights of the victim and the fundamental rights of every citizen in ensuring that crime is investigated and dealt with in accordance with law," bench further said.

The matter is listed for next hearing on July 19.

The petitioner was represented by advocate Mehmood Pracha.

Case Title: Nasima V. The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.| Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 551/2022