HC questions police probe into custodial death

The Delhi High Court today questioned the city police's probe into the custodial death of a man, observing the focus of the investigation appears to be on exonerating the cops involved in the incident.
Justice Siddharth Mridul made the observation after the SIT probing the matter told the court that though it has identified the officers, it was looking into the merit of the allegations as well as medical records to ascertain what role was played by each of them before taking any of them into custody.
"What do you (police) normally do when someone loses their life? Do you look at the merits of the case or medical records before taking persons involved into custody? What is this? A banana republic?

"What kind of investigation are you conducting? I get the impression that investigation thus far has focused on exonerating those involved. The investigation appears to be focused on how to get them off the hook," the court told DCP Rajiv Sharma, who is heading the special investigating team (SIT).
The court was also displeased at one of the senior officers of the SIT who did not take steps for recording the statement of an eyewitness despite that person calling the officer several times to give his testimony.
It also noted in its order that the eyewitness had called ACP Sukhwinder Singh after a public notice was put out by SIT inviting information from the people.

"It is an admitted position that despite having made the calls, SIT did not record his (eyewitness) statement...," it said.

Justice Mridul, thereafter, directed one of the high court registrars to take the witness to the concerned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) in Karkardooma court and to ensure his statement was recorded.
The incident had taken place on September 7 at Nand Nagri
in north-east Delhi when the victim, Shahnawaz Chaudhary, tried to intervene in a roadside fight between a couple and the police, according to a petition filed by his wife, Rabia.
Chaudhary was picked up and taken to the police station. Later, he was rushed to a hospital where he was declared 'brought dead'.

During the day-long proceedings today, the court also watched a video clipping of the incident after police claimed that the victim, 34-year-old Shahnawaz Chaudhary, was unconscious when he entered the police van and might even have died.
Police also refuted the allegations of Chaudhary's wife Rabia that he was beaten with sticks and rods, contending she never said so in her first statement.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for Rabia, however, claimed the SIT had cut the first 30-40 seconds of the video which allegedly showed the victim being beaten up.
This allegation was denied by DCP Sharma who said if even one second of the video has been changed or cut, the SIT can be hanged.

Senior advocate Kirti Uppal and special public prosecutor Shailendra Babbar, appearing for the police, requested the court to issue directions for constituting a medical board to explain the head injury on Chaudhary and for recreating the scene of incident to ascertain how the victim died.
While the court refused to pass any such order at this stage, it questioned the police why it did not exhume the body and send it for a second post mortem and why the medical history of the victim was not examined.
In her petition, Rabia has sought action against the officers involved and a compensation of Rs five crore.