Badlapur sexual assault | Bombay high court's 6 tough questions: ‘Why was accused Akshay Shinde shot in head?’
Badlapur encounter: Bombay HC said shoot-out of Akshay Shinde could have been avoided and urged for probe into his death to be carried out in a fair manner.
Badlapur sexual assault case accused Akshay Shinde shot dead: The Bombay high court on Wednesday, September 25, made some sharp observations and raised critical questions to the Maharashtra Police concerning the killing of Akshay Shinde, the accused in the Badlapur sexual assault case.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan said the shoot-out of Akshay Shinde could have been avoided and urged for the probe into his death to be carried out in a fair and impartial manner.
The bench also said if it would be constrained to pass appropriate orders if the probe is not done properly.
"We are not suspecting the police on their activities, but come clean on all aspects," the court said.
The Bombay high bench posted the matter for further hearing on October 3, by when the police would have to take a decision on the complaint submitted by Akshay Shinde's father, Anna Shinde, seeking an FIR against the police officers concerned.
Badlapur encounter case: Bombay high court 6 observations and questions
- The Bombay high court said the shoot-out could have been avoided if the police had tried to overpower Badlapur case accused Akshay Shinde first and added it was very hard to believe that he managed to seize a pistol from a police officer and open fire. Why the accused was shot in the head, and not on hand or legs first? the high court asked.
- The Bombay high court said while it was not raising any suspicion at this stage, it was very hard to believe that Akshay Shinde managed to seize a pistol from a police officer and open fire. It is not very easy to unlock and open fire from a pistol, the bench said.
- Appearing for the state, chief public prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar said the Maharashtra CID was also probing the incident. “Two FIRs one is u/s 307 and one is an Accidental Death Report (ADR). Both are being probed by the CID,” Live Law quoted Venegavkar as saying. At this stage Justice Mohite-Dere asked Venegavkar about the timeline, noting that there was “nothing confidential” about it.
- The bench also asked about the time when the body was sent for post-mortem, whether it was videographed, the cause of death and about the injuries to the deceased and the to officer. Venegavkar said, “The body was sent at 8am to JJ HospitalThe . autopsy was video-graphed. The cause of death was bleeding. Bullet pierced one side of the head and exited from the other. Injury to the officer is also a pierced one.”
- The bench said while it was not raising any suspicion at this stage, it was very hard to believe Akshay Shinde managed to seize a pistol from a police officer and open fire. Justice Chavan said, “Mr Venegavkar this is hard to believe like this. Prima facie this cannot be trusted. A layman cannot fire a pistol unlike a revolver which any tom, dick and harry can do. A weak man cannot load the pistol as it needs strength. Have you ever used a pistol? I have used it 100 times so I know this. Why to be so negligent and casual when you are escorting a man, who is accused of serious offences? What is the SOP? Was he handcuffed?”
- The court also asked, “You said the accused fired three bullets towards the police. Only one hit the cop what about the other 2? Ordinarily, for self defence we fire at the legs. Where would one usually fire for self defence? May be on the hand or the leg.” To this Venegavkar said that the officer concerned did not think of this and he “just reacted”, the Live Law report added.
