“This Was Not an Encounter”: Bombay High Court Criticizes Police for Killing Badlapur Sexual Assault Accused
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday strongly criticized the Maharashtra police for the killing of Akshay Shinde, the Badlapur sexual assault accused who was shot dead in an alleged encounter by the Thane Police. The court questioned the police’s version of events, raising doubts over their claim of self-defense.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Prithviraj Chavan was hearing a plea from Shinde’s father, requesting a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the encounter. The court expressed skepticism about the police’s statement that Shinde had snatched a constable’s weapon, which prompted the officers to shoot him.
The Bench slammed the police for their failure to secure the firearm and questioned why the accused was not shot in the leg, a standard procedure in such situations. “How could we believe that trained officers couldn’t overpower the accused?” the Court asked, stressing that Shinde could have been subdued rather than killed.
“This cannot be termed as an encounter. This is not an encounter,” the court remarked, indicating doubts over the police’s narrative. The judges also questioned whether Shinde had any prior experience with firearms and whether the gun’s safety was on, as the incident seemed difficult to visualize without further evidence.
Background of the Case:
Akshay Shinde, a 23-year-old man, had been accused of sexually abusing two kindergarten students at a school in Badlapur in August. He was arrested and placed in judicial custody. On September 23, he was taken into police custody again from Taloja jail in connection with a sexual abuse case filed by his wife. During the transit to Thane, Shinde allegedly snatched a firearm from a constable, injured him, and was then fatally shot by another officer.
Legal Arguments and Court Observations:
During the hearing, Shinde’s father’s counsel called for an FIR to be registered against the policemen involved and for CCTV footage from the relevant areas to be preserved. The counsel argued that the accused had met his parents the day before the incident and showed no signs of preparing for such an act, stating, “He had sought details about his bail and received money for essentials.”
The Court grilled the police on their post-encounter procedures, asking whether the scene was secured to prevent tampering and questioning the delay in transferring the case to the CID. “Time is of the essence in any investigation. Delay leads to suspicion. What prevented you from handling the case sooner?” the Bench asked.
The judges stressed the need for an impartial investigation, stating, “We expect an unbiased probe, even though the police are involved.”
The Court also ordered that CCTV footage of Shinde’s time in the barrack, his exit, and his interaction with his family be preserved. Call data records of Shinde and the four officers involved were also to be collected for the dates of September 23 and 24.
The matter is scheduled for its next hearing on October 3.
