Police must shed religious, casteist biases: Supreme Court orders SIT probe in Akola Riots assault case

The Supreme Court on Thursday castigated the Maharashtra Police for failing to register a first information report (FIR) and investigate the assault on a 17-year-old boy during the Akola riots of May 2023, terming it a case of “total dereliction of duty.”.A Bench of Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma observed:“Needless to state, when members of the police force don their uniforms, they are required to shed their personal predilections and biases, be they religious, racial, casteist or otherwise. They must be true to the call of duty attached to their office and their uniform with absolute and total integrity. Unfortunately, in the case on hand, this did not happen.”.Holding that the police's inaction revealed “patent dereliction of duties,” the Court ordered the Maharashtra Home Secretary to set up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of senior police officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities to investigate the assault on the appellant..The appellant, Mohammad Afzal Mohammad Sharif, alleged that he was attacked while witnessing four assailants fatally assaulting a man during the riots. Despite sustaining a head injury and being hospitalised, no FIR was registered on his complaint.The Court faulted the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court for dismissing his writ petition and accepting the police’s denial. It emphasised that the law placed a duty squarely on the police once they had knowledge of the medico-legal case.“Neither the Police Inspector nor the High Court are correct in their assumption and understanding that it was for the appellant or his relatives to pursue the police to take necessary steps in that regard and that the police were not required to take any steps, despite their knowledge of the commission of a cognizable offence," reads the judgment..Referring to Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Constitution Bench decision in Lalita Kumari v. Govt of UP, the Bench reiterated:“The registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation…The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering offence if cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence.”.The Court also censured the Superintendent of Police, Akola for failing to act on the written complaint lodged by the appellant’s father:“There is no explanation forthcoming as to whether he even undertook an enquiry to satisfy himself about the truth or otherwise of the information received, as mandated by the provision. This conduct on the part of a superior police officer of no less a rank than a Superintendent of Police is indeed a cause for great concern.”.Calling for disciplinary action against the police officers involved, the Court further ordered,“Measures shall also be initiated to instruct and sensitize the rank and file in the police department as to what law requires of them in the discharge of their duties.”The SIT has been asked to file its report within three months..The appellant was represented by Senior Advocate Abhay Mahadeo Thipsay and Advocates Fauzia Shakil, Tasmiya Taleha, Shoeb M Inamdar and M Huzaifa..[Read Judgment]