Delhi High Court: A petition was filed by the petitioner, mother of deceased young man who allegedly died during custodial interrogation, seeking to issue a direction constituting a “fresh’ Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising senior police officers with demonstrably unblemished record and credibility to carry-out an independent, impartial, professional and time-bound investigation into the death under the supervision of the Court and monitor the investigation by calling-for periodic status reports/action taken reports. Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., directed that investigation in case be transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi (“CBI’) for further investigation, in accordance with law and further directed that the CBI would be entitled to add to the FIR any other offence(s) as may be found to be made-out in the case. The Court also made clear that the investigation conducted thus far by Delhi Police, as well as all material and evidence collected and all statements recorded by them, shall form part of the records of the case, and shall be dealt-with conjointly with the material, evidence and statements that the CBI would collect/record in the further investigation.
The petitioner is the mother of deceased young man and Respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are respectively the Department of Home, Government of NCT of Delhi; the Investigating Officer of the Special Investigation Unit-I, Crime Branch, New Delhi. A young man, was allegedly a victim of police brutality during the protests the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, in North-East Delhi. On 24-02-2020, video footage captured the young man being encircled and beaten by policemen. Another video showed him and other young men lying injured on the road, being surrounded and assaulted by police officers. Despite this evidence, the Delhi Police’s investigation had not conclusively identified any of the officers involved. Although some suspects were identified, they gave deceptive responses in polygraph tests, and no one had been held accountable.
The young man was allegedly taken to GTB Hospital by the police, despite the doctors’ advice for further treatment in the neurosurgery department, he was taken to P.S. Jyoti Nagar instead. The man’s family collected him from the police station the next night, and he was immediately taken to Lok Nayak Hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries on 27-02-2020. His family filed the petition seeking a thorough investigation, as they believed the police were responsible for the death due to their brutal assault and subsequent neglect.
The Court noted that despite the presence of two sets of video footage showing the young man and others being beaten by the police was undisputed, the police failed to identify the perpetrators over four years. The investigation was delayed and lacked promptness, with crucial suspects identified only recently and the SHO involved undergoing a polygraph test only after four years. The claim that the young man’s family did not approach the police station until the night of 25-02-2020, contradicted normal human behavior. It was unlikely that they would not have sought him out immediately.
The Court further noted that the hospital records indicated that the young man was in poor condition when handed over to his family. The police failed to provide him with the necessary medical care as advised by the doctors. No investigation was conducted regarding his treatment at the police station. The police claimed that all CCTV cameras at the station were non-functional during the relevant time, which seemed suspicious.
The Court observed that it was implausible that the young man, if kept at the police station for his own safety, did not inform the police about his family or his residence. The police’s claim that they kept him for his safety was unconvincing, given the ongoing riots and their responsibilities. The malfunctioning of all CCTV cameras at the police station during the critical period raised doubts. The police had not complied with Supreme Court directions regarding the maintenance and repair of CCTV cameras in police stations.
The Court further stated that the police’s failure to address the possibility of custodial violence and their neglect in providing medical care suggested a criminal neglect of duty. The sophisticated forensic tests conducted on the police officers after four years did not inspire confidence in the investigation’s credibility. The Court emphasized the importance of a fair investigation, which is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The investigation must be seen to be fair and just to maintain the credibility of the justice system.
Thus, the Court found the investigation by the Delhi Police to be tardy and inadequate and noted that the suspects, who were supposed to uphold the law, appeared to be driven by biased motives. To ensure a fair and thorough investigation, the Court ordered the transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and directed all records and evidence collected by the Delhi Police were to be handed over to the CBI for further investigation. The Court directed the Director of the CBI to assign the case to an appropriate officer for expeditious investigation.
[Kismatun v. State NCT of Delhi, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 4996, decided on 23-07-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Ms. Vrinda Grover, Mr. Soutik Banerjee and Ms. Devika Tulsiani, Advocates for petitioner
Mr. Amit Prasad, SPP with Mr. Ayodhya Prasad, Ms. Ruchika Prasad, Ms. Kavya Agarwal, Ms. Chanya Jaitly, Advocates and ACP Pankaj Arora, P.S: Crime Branch.
Buy Constitution of India HERE
