Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Prakash D. Naik, J.
Mehrunnisa Kadir Shaikh - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1954 of 2019
Decided On : 27-03-2023
Based on the provided legal document, the case involves allegations of custodial death of Altaf Kadir Shaikh and the subsequent investigation and proceedings. The key points are as follows:
The deceased was taken into police custody and was found dead on the same day, with evidence suggesting external and internal injuries, including contusions and subarachnoid hemorrhage (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Multiple medical opinions indicate that the cause of death could be due to head injuries caused by external trauma, such as contusions and subarachnoid hemorrhage, or due to toxicity from substances like Alprazolam and Ethyl Alcohol, with some opinions favoring trauma as the primary cause (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The investigation initially supported the view that the police officials had committed acts of conspiracy, assault, and wrongful confinement, with evidence such as missing station diary entries and absence of arrest memos supporting allegations of illegal detention and assault (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The order of a special judge to transfer proceedings was challenged, and the court emphasized that there was sufficient evidence to frame serious charges, including homicide, based on injuries and the circumstances of custody (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The court highlighted the importance of examining whether the death was caused by external injuries or other factors like intoxication, and noted that conflicting medical opinions should be considered during trial, with the final determination of cause of death to be made during the trial process (!) (!) (!) .
The legal proceedings involved multiple stages, including investigation by the CBI, filing of charges, and judicial orders to frame charges under various sections of the IPC, with particular focus on conspiracy, assault, and wrongful confinement, and the need for a speedy trial was underscored (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The court recognized that the acts of police officials, such as assault and illegal detention, could amount to violations of fundamental rights and human rights, and that proceedings in cases of custodial death are to be tried expeditiously in designated courts for human rights violations (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The final order directed the trial court to reframe charges appropriately, ensuring that offences under sections related to homicide and related violence are properly prosecuted, and emphasized the importance of proceeding with the case in accordance with law and within a specified timeframe (!) (!) (!) (!) .
In summary, the case revolves around allegations of custodial torture leading to death, conflicting medical opinions on the cause of death, procedural issues regarding transfer and framing of charges, and the necessity for an expedited trial to determine the actual cause and the criminal liability of the police officials involved.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to order on grounds of improper transfer. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. circumstances surrounding death of altaf kadir shaikh. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. investigation findings and lack of prosecutable evidence. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. arguments for framing charges under various ipc sections. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. discrepancies in medical evidence regarding cause of death. (Para 16 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. power to set aside erroneous order and frame appropriate charges. (Para 32 , 33) |
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. The Petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 3/1/2018 passed by learned Special Judge (CBI) below Exh.1 in Sessions Case No.826 of 2014 directing that the record and proceedings in C.C. No.1170/PW/2010 be transferred to Court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai for trial of offences punishable under Ss. 120-B r/w 323, 342 of INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short 'IPC').
2. The Petitioner is the mother of deceased Altaf Kadir Shaikh who according to her died due to custodial torture inflicted by the Accused/Respondent Nos.2 to 4.
3. The Petitioner's contention is that on 11/9/2009 at about 04:00 hours in the morning, the Petitioner heard a knock at her door. Three persons were standing outside. They asked whether Altaf is available. She told them that he is sleeping. All of them came inside her house and on seeing Altaf sleeping they started beating, slapping and kicking him. One of them disclosed that he was Sub-Inspector Khedekar from Ghatkopar Police Station and had come to pick up Altaf for his presence is required by the SHO of Ghatkopar Police Station. She requested him that since the SHO will not be present at the wee hours, she will drop Altaf at the Ghatkopar Police Station early morning. P.S.I. Khedekar did not listen to her request and kept on slapping Altaf. Three of them caught hold of Altaf by his collar and back of his pant and dragged him to the auto rickshaw by kicking and punching him constantly. They pulled Altaf's hair and slapped him on his face. They threw him in auto rickshaw and took him to Ghatkopar Police Station. Sub-Inspector Khedekar had told the Petitioner that she should visit the Police Station in the morning. Two Policemen visited Petitioner's house. They told her that she have been called at Ghatkopar Police Station for recording her statement. She accompanied them. On the way she was informed that Altaf has been hit on the head and he was admitted in Rajawadi Hospital. She was taken to Rajawadi Hospital. On reaching Rajawadi Hospital, the Petitioner found her son's body lying on the stretcher. His body had unbuttoned shirt and underwear. His body had bruises. Injury marks were present at his head, hands, arms, back, legs, ears and blood was oozing. Lady Nayab Tahsildar was present. She was recording Panchanama. Petitioner's thumb impression and her elder son's signatures were attested on written and blank papers stating that Altaf's body and Panchanam is required to be sent for conducting postmortem urgently. Postmortem was conducted by panel of five Doctors. Petitioner was informed that she will get postmortem report within ten days. Petitioners husband visited J.J. Hospital for collecting Postmortem Report. He was told by hospital authorities that the report has been sent to Assistant Commissioner of Police. Thereafter, it was informed that, Postmortem Report had been sent to New Delhi. ADR report was filed vide ADR No. 184 of 2009. The Petitioner filed complaint agitating about the death of Altaf Shaikh in Police custody and seeking investigation. No FIR was registered.
4. The Petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 2613 of 2009 before this Court contending that her son Altaf was killed in Police custody. Directions were sought that case be registered against the Police Officers, who according to her were responsible for the murder of her son. This Court made several observations regarding conduct of Police and held that prima facie the death of deceased Alta
(1) At the stage of framing of charge probative value of material on record cannot be gone into, material brought on record by prosecution has be accepted as true at that stage.(2) It is no part of o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of custodial death and police atrocities, the nature of charges should reflect the aggravated culpability indicated by the evidence, ....
The court emphasized the necessity for independent investigations into custodial deaths and affirmed the intrinsic protection of the right to life under Article 21, mandating scrutiny in cases of sus....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for the trial court to form an opinion based on the material placed on record by the Investigating Officer and not conduct a mini trial or....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on inculpatory evidence to determine the circumstances of the deceased's death and the negation of the exculpatory plea presented by t....
Custodial death constitutes a severe violation of rights, demanding accountability from police, reaffirming the presumption of police knowledge in such cases for justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the charges should be framed based on the evidence collected by the investigating officer, and the court has the authority to direct the trial....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
