Background: A custodial death disguised as an encounter

The now deceased Akshay Shinde, a janitor employed at a school in Badlapur, was arrested in August 2024 on charges of sexually assaulting two minor girls. On September 23, 2024, while being escorted from Taloja jail to Kalyan, he was shot dead by police officers who claimed he had attempted to snatch a service revolver and fired at them. The police’s version — that they acted in self-defence — was accepted unquestioningly by the State. No FIR was registered against the policemen involved. Instead, the narrative of a justified encounter was quickly cemented in public discourse.

However, a magisterial inquiry under Section 176 of the CrPC, conducted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), painted a very different picture. The report concluded that the custodial death was not only suspicious but allegedly amounted to a deliberate killing. Key findings included the absence of the deceased’s fingerprints on the weapon he was alleged to have used, inconsistencies in the police version of events, and a complete lack of procedural compliance. The bench, after examining the judicial inquiry report, concluded that a detailed investigation into the alleged encounter was necessary, given the undeniable fact that the accused died from bullet wounds inflicted by a police officer while in custody. The Court observed that any refusal to investigate such a death not only weakens the rule of law but also diminishes public trust in the justice system and enables those responsible to escape accountability. (Detailed reports may be read here, here and here).

State’s inaction and judicial intervention

The deceased’s parents, devastated and destitute, lodged a complaint at the Manpada police station the day after the incident. They received no response. In November, they filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking a fair investigation. On February 24, 2025, the petitioner and his wife expressed a desire to withdraw their case. However, the Court declined to let the matter rest, citing serious questions surrounding the legality of the police action that led to Akshay’s custodial death. Emphasising the findings in the Magistrate’s report, the bench observed that ignoring such concerns would amount to shirking its constitutional duty. The Court underlined that in a democracy, citizens have the right to transparency and accountability from law enforcement, especially when a death occurs in custody. To ensure a fair inquiry into these troubling issues, the Court appointed senior advocate Ms. Manjula Rao as amicus curiae on February 27, 2025.

The State, through the Advocate General, insisted that no FIR was required, as a preliminary CID inquiry had not found enough material to proceed. The Court rebuked this position, noting that a preliminary inquiry cannot override a judicial officer’s findings under a statutory process like Section 176 CrPC.

Judicial Findings: Constitution over complicity

The judgment goes far beyond procedural correctness and squarely addresses the constitutional implications of the State’s inaction. The Court held that where a custodial death is prima facie established, and an inquiry report discloses cognisable offences, the police are under a mandatory obligation to register an FIR. Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2013), the bench reiterated that registration of an FIR in such cases is not discretionary. The Court also held that the authorities were duty bound to adhere to the principles laid down in Lalita Kumari case and ensure that the case which prima facie disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, is taken to its logical end.

Justice Mohite-Dere and Justice Gokhale were unsparing in their critique of the State and the duty-bound law enforcement. The Court further relied on PUCL v. State of Maharashtra (2014), and Om Prakash v. State of Jharkhand (2012), and opined that in the present case there was an even greater need for transparency, as the victim was already in police custody, accompanied by four police personnel, yet the police claim it to be an encounter. The judgment acknowledges the unequal power dynamic between the victims and the State, and calls upon constitutional courts to play an active role in redressing such injustice, especially when the complainants are from the poorest rings of the society.

Key takeaways from the judgment

1. The silence of the state and the failure to act

“Upon perusal of the inquiry report, we are satisfied that the case in question i.e. the encounter requires thorough investigation, as it is undisputed that the deceased succumbed to bullet injuries inflicted by a police officer, when he was in police custody.” (Para 28)

Through the judgement, the bench has affirmed that the deceased was in police custody—making the death a custodial killing, which imposes a heightened duty on the State to ensure accountability. Second, the Court is unequivocal in stating that the death was not a matter of speculation—the bullet injuries by a police officer are undisputed. By declaring that this requires “thorough investigation,” the Court implicitly rebukes the State for failing to act even in the face of clear and damning evidence. It also sets the stage for invoking Lalita Kumari v. State of UP, where the Supreme Court had held that registration of FIR is mandatory when a cognisable offence is disclosed.

2. Justice cannot depend on the strength of the victim

When the victim’s parents pleaded to withdraw the case, citing extreme hardship and threats, the Court refused to let the matter drop.

“We may also note, why, despite the petitioner and his wife expressing their desire to withdraw the petition, we thought it appropriate to proceed with the same, by appointing an amicus. Closing the matter in their absence would have been easy, but a Constitutional Court cannot ignore the State’s failure to fulfil its obligations.” (Para 29)

The Court acknowledges the vulnerability of the petitioners—driven by fear and systemic intimidation—but refuses to treat their withdrawal as the end of the road.
By stating that “closing the matter would have been easy,” the bench reflects a deep self-awareness about how courts often abdicate responsibility under the guise of procedural closure. But here, the judges take the harder, morally necessary path—appointing an amicus to carry the case forward. Moreover, this judgment lays down a precedent that when there is a failure by the State to discharge constitutional obligations, the Court must step in suo-moto if necessary. Justice, in this case, is framed not as something that is contingent upon the victim’s persistence, but as a constitutional imperative that the Court must uphold regardless.

3. The human cost of impunity

“A refusal to investigate a crime undermines the Rule of Law, erodes public faith in justice, and allows perpetrators to go unpunished. The State’s reluctance to even register an FIR has left the petitioner and his wife feeling helpless, forcing them to forgo closure over their son’s untimely death. Such negligence weakens public trust in institutions and compromises the State’s legitimacy. As a Constitutional Court, we cannot permit this and be mute spectators.” (Para 30)

This judgement is both a legal summation and a moral indictment. It links procedural failure (not registering an FIR) with broader democratic decay: erosion of rule of law, denial of closure, and collapse of institutional trust. By pointing out the emotional toll on the family—“feeling helpless, forcing them to forgo closure”—the Court humanises the victims and frames the denial of justice as a form of psychological and social violence. The part about the Court not being a “mute spectator” reinforces the judiciary’s constitutional role as an active guardian, not a passive observer. What makes this judgement particularly powerful is that it recognises how systemic impunity—not just one incident—can delegitimise the entire State in the eyes of the public.

4. Justice as Performance: Rebuilding public trust

“This course of action is warranted in the interest of justice, to advance the cause of justice and to uphold public confidence in the justice delivery system. The same is necessitated, keeping in mind the adage ‘Justice must not only be done, but seen to be done’.” (Para 33)

Here, the Court re-iterates one of the most well-known principles of natural justice—justice must not only be done, but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done—to justify its decision to direct further investigation despite the withdrawal of the petition by the victim’s family. This reflects the Court’s awareness of its public role. It is not enough for the judiciary to silently correct wrongs behind closed doors—the process must be transparent and principled, so as to inspire public faith in the legal system. The Court positions itself not merely as a neutral arbiter but as a guardian of legitimacy—conscious that public confidence is integral to the administration of justice. In the context of custodial violence and the inaction of the police, this judgment becomes even more significant as it signals that the Court is not merely acting to correct one injustice—it is also seeking to restore faith in the justice delivery system that had been severely compromised.

Court’s directions

The Court ordered the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), which will be supervised by Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime), Mumbai, Lakhmi Gautam. The SIT is to be headed by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Police and will be relieved of all other duties to ensure full attention to the case. The CID was directed to hand over all files and documents to the SIT within 48 hours, and the investigation is to proceed independently of the earlier CID probe. Importantly, the Court held that even if the petitioner withdraws, “the criminal law can be set into motion by anyone.”

“Hence, we are left with no other option but to constitute a SIT under the supervision of Shri Lakhmi Gautam, the current Joint Commissioner of Police, Crime, Mumbai. The Joint Commissioner shall form the SIT, comprising officers of his choice from any department and the team shall be headed by a Deputy Commissioner of Police. If the selected officers are from different locations or department, they shall be relieved of their current duties to enable their full participation in the investigation. The State CID to hand over all papers relating to the ADR collected by them during the ADR investigation, to the Joint Commissioner of Police, Crime, Mumbai, within two days. Accordingly, the SIT to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, promptly, having regard to what is observed herein-above by us, in particular, the judgment of the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari (Supra), on receipt of papers. If the petitioner does not come forward for the reasons cited by him, the criminal law can be set into motion by anyone, including the police.” (Para 32)

Impact and significance

“Only because the complainant/informant/victim hails from the poor strata of the society, his grievance cannot be ignored or brushed aside by the State. The offence, if any, is against the State and it is the responsibility of the State to take appropriate steps, if not on the basis of the petitioner’s complaint, even on the basis of the inquiry report or otherwise, on the basis of the information received and take the same to its logical end. Any criminal offence is an offence against the society and the State acts as the guardian of human rights and as the protector of law.” (Para 25)

This ruling is significant for several reasons. First, it is a clear reminder that law enforcement officials are not above the law. In a political climate where “encounter” killings have been valorised, especially against marginalised accused, this judgment asserts that even those who stand accused have constitutional rights — and the State must be held accountable when those rights are violated.

Second, the Court’s refusal to allow procedural withdrawal due to fear or hardship sends a powerful signal: when the State fails to act, constitutional courts must. This affirms the judiciary’s proactive role in safeguarding rights, even when victims are unable to fight for themselves.

Lastly, the judgment reframes justice as a right, not a privilege — particularly for the marginalised. By declaring that every offence is an offence against society, the Court shifts responsibility for justice from the victim to the State. In doing so, it not only upholds the rule of law but strengthens the democratic promise of equality before law.

This is a judgment that pierces through the veneer of legal formality to deliver substantive justice. It affirms that silence and inaction in the face of State violence are constitutionally impermissible — and that courts must speak loudest when the victims have been rendered voiceless.

The complete judgment may be read below:

Related:

Bombay High Court directs filing of a First Information Report (FIR) against the 5 cops held responsible for death of accused in Badlapur Sexual Assault case

CJP submits objections to Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024 over serious threats to civil liberties

“This Means FIR”: Delhi Court orders further investigation, FIR against BJP leader Kapil Mishra five years after Delhi riots

SC: Recent judgment in the Imran Pratapgarhi case, what are police powers under section 173 (3) BNS?

The post A Judgement of Conscience: Bombay High Court orders SIT Probe into alleged fake encounter in Badlapur appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Akshay Shinde was an attendant at a school in Badlapur and was arrested in August, 2024 for allegedly sexually assaulting two minor girls in the school toilet. On the 23rd of September, 2024, Shinde was killed while he was being transported from Taloja jail for questioning in another case of sexual assault that had been filed against him by his wife.

The police alleged that Shinde snatched a gun from one of the police personnel present in the van transporting him and opened fire, and he was killed in retaliatory firing that was done as a means of self-defence. He was killed by a Senior Police Inspector while one Additional Police Inspector, two constables and one police driver were present in the van.

Encounter killings are regarded as a legitimate way of law and order enforcement by different sections of society, but the widespread support does not make the action right. Encounter killings stand against the constitutional machinery of India where a person is considered innocent until proven guilty, the constitutional guarantee of ensuring that due process of law is followed, and the principle of proportionality of the punishment. Such arbitrary actions are unconstitutional, illegal and unacceptable.

As per the data collected by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), between the years 2016 to 2022, there have been 813 cases of encounter killings that is an average of 1 killing every three days. This data is alarming and raises concerns regarding the arbitrary and illegal actions of the police.

Here is a quick overview of the proceedings in the case –

September 25, 2024 – After a criminal writ petition filed by Anna Shinde, the father of accused Akshay Shinde, the Bombay High Court began hearing the case on the 25th of September, 2024. On 25th September, the court orally stated that it was hard to believe that the accused, who wasn’t a “strong man,” couldn’t be subdued by the police officers accompanying him and that the use of force was necessary. It has been argued by the Petitioner that when he met the accused, his son, on 23rd September, 2024, there was no indication that he was in a troubled state of mind.

Mr. Venegavkar, the learned Public Prosecutor (P.P.) in the case, mentioned that at the time of the transfer, the accused was sitting in the rear end of the vehicle along with an Assistant Police Inspector (API) and two constables, while the Police Inspector (PI) sat in front with the driver. The API later called the PI and informed him that the accused was getting unstable and was quarrelling, after which, the vehicle was stopped and the PI came and sat in the rear end of the vehicle. Shortly after that, the accused snatched the service gun from the API and fired two bullets towards the police officers which missed the officers, and immediately after that, the PI pulled out his service gun and shot at the accused which hit him on his head resulting in his death.

The Court noted that the Human Rights Commission and the Judicial Magistrate be informed of the custodial death as mandated by the law.

October 3, 2024 – On the next hearing of the case, that is on the 3rd of October, 2024, the Court noted that the post-mortem report has been forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) for conducting an inquiry under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) into the custodial death of the accused Akshay Shinde, and all other documents required for the same would also be transferred at the earliest possible time. Further, the Court requested for the Magisterial Inquiry Report to be expedited.

November 18, 2024 – By an order dated 18th November, 2024, the High Court granted an extension till 2nd December, 2024 for the completion of the magisterial inquiry in the case, and noted that all the necessary documents for the inquiry had been transferred to the Magistrate.

December 2, 2024 – The date for submission of the Magistrate Inquiry Report was further extended to 20th January, 2025 by an order dated 2nd December, 2024 as certain necessary documents had not been submitted to the Magistrate.

January 20, 2025 – On 20th January, 2025, the High Court perused the report submitted by the Magistrate after his inquiry in the case. As per the report, the five police personnel have been held to be responsible for the custodial death of the accused.

Based on the inquiry, the division bench of the High Court, consisting of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale, has directed the State government to file an FIR and sought details regarding the agency that will probe this case. The Court directed the Government to provide the details of the agency that will investigate the case to the High Court within a period of two weeks.

The report submitted by the Magistrate has also noted that there were no fingerprints of the accused on the weapon used and no gunshot residue has been detected, therefore the use of force by the police personnel was not justified.

The report has supported the allegations of false encounter made by the father of the accused.

The Court held that apart from providing the State Human Rights Commission with a copy of the magisterial inquiry report as per protocol, a copy should also be provided to the State and the father of the accused who had filed a petition for an investigation into the death of the accused.

This case highlights the dire situation of law and order enforcement in India where it is a common practice for the police to take the law into their own hands without any fear of retribution. There is a rampant abuse of power and disregard for due process and the judicial machinery. Encounter killings are becoming a major reason for erosion of public trust in the judicial system of India. There is an urgent need for reforms in India’s law enforcement system and to increase accountability of the police, so as to act as a deterrent for the police from arbitrarily and wrongly using their power.

Related: 

1. Maharashtra: Two minor girls sexually assaulted, delay in FIR, failure of accountability, attempts to cover up crime
2. Maharashtra: Swift action on protesters, delayed justice for sexual assault against minors, police priorities need to be questioned
3. Bombay HC chastens Maharashtra Police for shoddy investigation in cases involving sexual assault against minors and women

The post Bombay High Court directs filing of a First Information Report (FIR) against the 5 cops held responsible for death of accused in Badlapur Sexual Assault case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a case involving sexual assault against two kindergarten girl students at a school in Badlapur, the Bombay HC chastened the police authorities for the delay in registering the FIR and victim statement of one of the girls.  It also pulled up the school authorities for not reporting the case to the police and asked whether the police had registered a case against the school under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. When Advocate General Birendra Saraf told the court that action against the school will be taken now, the court retorted that it should have been done at the earliest and ordered the police to take action against the school authorities, Bar and Bench reported. The bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan also questioned the police for not naming the second child victim in the FIR and sought explanation for the same.

The court made these queries and remarks while hearing the suo moto case [High Court on its own motion v. State of Maharashtra] on August 22, 2024 concerning the lapses in police investigation in the case of sexual abuse of two 4-year-old girls at a school in Thane’s Badlapur.

The bench was reported saying that “These girls have complained but several cases go unreported. It needs huge amount of courage to speak about all this. Definitely the Police hasn’t played its role the way it ought to be. Had the police be sensitised, this wouldn’t have happened.” The court further conveyed its displeasure and said “We are appalled by the fact that the Badlapur Police has taken no efforts to record the statement of the second victim girl with either under Section 161 and 164.”

Notably, the Press Trust of India reported that thousands of protesters blocked railway tracks at Badlapur station and stormed the school building on Tuesday (August 20, 2024) after the case came to the limelight. The accused has been identified as a school sweeper and had reportedly assaulted the girls in the school washroom. The police informed the court that they have formed the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in the case and have arrested the accused Akshay Shinde on August 17, following the complaint reported by the parents of the victim on August 16. The state also told the Court that statements of the girls have been recorded and their medical examination has also been conducted. The bench said that counselling of the girls needs to be undertaken, asked the state to inform in that regard.

Notably, it is alleged that the parents of the victim girls were made to wait for 11 hours at Badlapur police station before the officials took note of taking their complaints. On this issue the bench said that “The first thing in such cases of minors is police must have registered FIR. But they made the family wait for hours. This discourages the public from reporting such incidents.”

Criticising the Maharashtra Police, the High Court said “People shouldn’t lose faith in public. You should know what the motto of the Maharashtra Police is सद्रक्षणाय खलनिग्रहणाय (Sadarakshanaya Khalanigrahanay). It means to protect the good and restrain the wicked. Please be reminded of this…People should not come out on the streets like this for getting an FIR lodged.”

In a separate matter in which a minor girl was raped and who’s four and half month-old foetus was clandestinely aborted by a private hospital in Mumbai, another bench of Bombay HC rebuked the Maharashtra Police for deficiencies in the investigation. Importantly, the hospital had destroyed all the evidence regarding the abortion and had discarded the foetus.

Taking cue from the Badlapur case, the bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Neela Gokhale took a shot at the police and said “Every day, we come across at least four cases of serious crimes against women which aren’t probed properly… This is pathetic… Don’t you have specialised officers or women officers? Why to let only constables and head constables probe the cases. Why isn’t the Police sensitive in such cases?”

Justice Gadkari said, “Unless people protest your department won’t investigate? Is the State of Maharashtra trying to give us a signal that unless people protest it won’t take crimes against women seriously? Every day we are hearing of some or the other rape or a POCSO case”, LiveLaw reported.

The bench also questioned DCP Chowgule-Shringi and asked how come the police was not aware of the fact that a ‘hasty’ abortion carried out on the victim, who happened to be minor at the time of the incident. When the officer told the court that statement of the victim has been recorded by the police under Section 164, the bench replied that “But how will you prove the fact that the accused impregnated the victim? What if the court says the 164 statements are not inspiring confidence? Where does the case go then? Will this not help the accused? Is the police now helping the accused to save him from the clutches of law? How can the hospital destroy such vital piece of evidence?”

It further said “Had we not taken judicial note, this couldn’t have come to light. Shouldn’t we record that all this is being done only to assist the accused in a POCSO case. How can the hospital carry out termination of a 4 and a half months foetus by consent of the minor girl, who lodged Rape case against accused…And worst is how can the hospital not maintain the evidence and go ahead and discard the entire evidence despite our clear orders that whenever the pregnancy of a rape victim is aborted, the tissue needs to be preserved for the purpose of DNA Sampling”.

The court ordered the DCP to file an affidavit detailing the investigation plan of the police and asked what action it proposes to take against the hospital, which destroyed the evidence. Moreover, it also directed the police authorities to verify whether the applicant Tarun Singh obtained the consent for the abortion either fraudulently or by force from the victim and her family.

The bench further expressed its concern over the manner in which investigations are being carried out by the police in cases related to women and children, despite repeated court orders flagging poor investigations in such cases. The judges said that if the state of Maharashtra is unable to pursue proper investigation in these matters, it should make a public declaration that it will not henceforth probe such serious cases.

Related:

Supreme Court stands firm on POCSO cases, overturns high court decision | CJP

Accused under POSCO granted bail on condition of marriage to victim: Allahabad HC | SabrangIndia

1.9 lakh POCSO cases pending in Fast Track Courts: Ministry of Women and Child Development | SabrangIndia

The post Bombay HC chastens Maharashtra Police for shoddy investigation in cases involving sexual assault against minors and women appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While some cases that elicited huge social media outrage recently have sparked widespread protests while and such incidents where the victims were marginalised groups have skipped the eyes of the media, the deep-rooted issues of gender-based violence and inadequate enforcement of laws have made meaningful change elusive. The recent incident in Badlapur, Thane, Maharashtra, where two young girls were allegedly sexually assaulted in a school, is a tragic reminder of the vulnerabilities that both children and women face in India today.

Two four-year-old girls attending pre-primary classes at a well-known co-ed school in Badlapur were allegedly sexually assaulted by a 23-year-old male cleaner named Akshay Shinde on August 12 and August 13, 2024. The incidents reportedly took place in the girls’ restroom, which lacked supervision by any female staff. Shinde had been hired on a contractual basis starting August 1, 2024.

The situation came to light when one of the girls complained of pain and revealed her ordeal to her parents. The concerned parents then discovered that a second girl had also been subjected to the same alleged abuse. According to a report by India Today, which cited the FIR, the sexual assaults occurred between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m. on August 13. One of the young victims reported pain in her private areas, and when questioned by her parents, she disclosed that the accused had inappropriately touched her while she was in the school restroom. The complaint further mentioned that the girl appeared scared and informed her parents that an older male at the school, whom she referred to as “dada” (Marathi for elder brother), had undressed her and touched her inappropriately.

Alarmed by this, the girl’s parents contacted the family of her friend, who revealed that their daughter was also frightened of going to school. Both girls were subsequently taken to a local doctor, who confirmed that they had been sexually assaulted. Following this, the parents decided to file a sexual assault complaint. The complaint was lodged on the night of August 16, leading to the arrest of the accused.

On the morning of August 20, the victims’ parents organised a silent protest outside the school. The protest saw participants holding banners demanding the death penalty for the accused. The entire town of Badlapur, Maharashtra, effectively came to a standstill as thousands of demonstrators gathered in support, also to express their outrage. Protesters blocked railway tracks at the local station and stormed the school building where the alleged abuse had taken place. (Details of the protest can be read here.)

According to PTI reports, accused Akshay Shinde, a sweeper employed by the school through a cleaning company on a contract basis beginning August 1, has had his police custody extended until August 26. In a recent development, the suspect was brought before a magistrate in Kalyan this morning under tight police security, as reported by PTI.

A recent report in the Print also suggests that the sexual assault might have taken place earlier that the indicated August 12/13, and that there may be other girls from the school who also have been sexually assaulted.

Delay on filing FIR, taking action by Maharashtra police:

The family reported the incident to the police on August 16, but they allege that the First Information Report (FIR) was not filed by the Maharashtra police until 12 hours later, around 9 p.m. that day, according to a report by India Today. The FIR details that the accused, Akshay Shinde, had sexually abused the child. Shinde was arrested by the police on August 17. According to the report of ThePrint after accessing the FIR, the accused was booked under Sections 65(2) (punishment for raping a woman under 12 years of age), 74 (assault or criminal force against a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty), 75 (sexual harassment) and 76 (assault or criminal force with the intent to disrobe) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4(2), 8 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The delay in filing the FIR has sparked public anger, as timely circumstantial and medical evidence is critical in such cases. This lack of timely police action has drawn sharp criticism from the opposition, with the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) coalition—comprising the Congress, NCP (Sharad Pawar faction), and Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray faction)—lambasting the Mahayuti-led ruling government for the police’s insensitivity. The opposition alleges that the girls’ parents were forced to wait for 12 hours at the Badlapur police station before their complaints were taken seriously.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has demanded a report from Maharashtra regarding the “12-hour delay” in registering the FIR after the parents lodged a complaint. The Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) also criticized the school, accusing it of attempting to cover up the crime instead of assisting the parents in filing a police complaint, as reported by PTI.

Susieben Shah, Chairperson of the Maharashtra State Commission for Protection of Child Rights, stated that the school where the two young girls were allegedly sexually abused chose to conceal the crime rather than help the parents file a police complaint. She mentioned that the child protection unit eventually escorted the parents to the police station to lodge the complaint. When Shah inquired about the case with the school management, they attempted to downplay the incident. She questioned why the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act should not be applied to the school management. As per the report of thePrint, The parents further highlighted that when the family approached the school for CCTV footage, the family said the authorities denied them access and said the CCTV system had been turned off for the past 15 days.

As per a report in India Today, Shah further noted that if the school had promptly alerted the police, the subsequent chaos in Badlapur could have been avoided, emphasizing that the issue stemmed from the parents being made to wait for 11 hours. Additionally, the medical examination of one of the girls was delayed by approximately 10 hours, with the mother, who was two months pregnant, being forced to wait during this time. Shah also recommended establishing a structured procedure for educational institutions to prevent similar situations in the future.

Priyank Kanungo, Chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), condemned the school for its insensitivity and efforts to cover up the incident, as well as the police for delaying the FIR. He mentioned that the Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra has taken strict actions against the officers involved, and the NCPCR plans to take severe measures against the school administration for attempting to suppress the case. A team from the NCPCR will be sent to investigate the matter further.

Post-FIR action by the Maharashtra government:

The Maharashtra government has suspended three police officials, including a senior inspector, for alleged dereliction of duty in handling the Badlapur sexual assault case and has transferred the investigation to a Special Investigation Team (SIT). The SIT will function under under IPS officer Arti Singh. Deputy Chief Minister and Home Minister Devendra Fadnavis confirmed these suspensions on social media platform X, highlighting the immediate suspension of the senior inspector, assistant sub-inspector, and head constable involved. However, these actions have done little to ease public outrage.

As per multiple media reports, in response to the mounting pressure by the people of Maharashtra, the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) also issued a stern warning, stating that legal action would be taken if the school management is found negligent. It is essential to highlight that the school management has suspended the principal, a class teacher, and a female attendant.

CM Shinde also reportedly instructed the Thane Police Commissioner to prioritize the case and called for a review to ensure the establishment of Sakhi Savitri committees in all schools, which are intended to protect students.

Additionally, Shinde proposed several measures to improve school safety and prevent future incidents, including the installation of complaint boxes in every school and stricter oversight of staff who interact regularly with students. The government has established a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to thoroughly investigate the case and ensure justice is served.

Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis announced that senior lawyer Ujjwal Nikam would serve as the special public prosecutor for the case and assured that the trial would be expedited in a Fast Track court. Chief Minister Eknath Shinde has also ordered a high-level investigation and reiterated that an SIT would be formed. It is essential to note that Ujjwal Nikam, who was previously fielded by the BJP against Congress’s Gaikwad Varsha Eknath in a recent Lok Sabha election, lost despite being chosen over two-time MP Poonam Mahajan for the Mumbai North Central seat.

Questions raised by the opposition parties against lawlessness in Maharashtra

The ruling government of Maharashtra has also come under severe criticism for responding to the outpouring of people’s anger with filing of reverse FIRs against the demonstrators, registering complaints against 300 individuals and arresting more than 40 with charges of rioting, stone-pelting, disrupting train services, and clashing with police. After receiving criticism for filing FIRs against the protestors itself, CM Shinde deemed the Badlapur protest to be politically motivated, with most protestors being outsiders and not locals.

Maharashtra CM Eknath Shinde alleges the massive protest over #BadlapurCrime is politically motivated. He claims opposition could not digest the success of their Ladli Bahena scheme, therefore the politically motivated protest against this case happened.

— Sudhir Suryawanshi (@ss_suryawanshi) August 21, 2024

On August 21, Senior Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut announced that the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) will call for a Maharashtra Bandh on August 24 in response to the Badlapur school sexual assault case. Raut stated that while MVA allies had convened to discuss seat-sharing for the upcoming state assembly elections, they chose to postpone that discussion in light of the current situation.

“The people of Maharashtra are outraged, and FIRs have been filed against those who protested. We have decided that on August 24, MVA will call for a Maharashtra Bandh over the Badlapur incident,” Raut said.

#WATCH | Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut says, “…We had come here to discuss seat sharing but then we thought that we would not discuss seat sharing and instead discuss the law and order in the state after the Badlapur incident. The people of Maharashtra are agitated and… pic.twitter.com/4LoFpEZoly

— ANI (@ANI) August 21, 2024

UBT Sena Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi –extremely vocal on the recent Kolkata rape and murder of a young woman doctor, also expressed her outrage over the incident. She joined other opposition leaders in criticizing the delay in filing the FIR, contrasting it with the police’s swift action against protesters.

Incident occurred on 13th August
FIR registered on 16th August
Kesarkar holds his press conference on 20th August AFTER protests erupt.

The school did not report the incident to cops, only when the child complained to her mother did the parents get her medically tested privately… https://t.co/TVhohZjvgv

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) August 20, 2024

Chaturvedi also put out a social media post on how a woman journalist covering the Baldapur sexual assault case was asked by Waman Mhatre, former Badlapur Mayor and a leader of the Shinde-led Shiv Sena part, if she had been sexually assaulted herself. As per Chaturvedi;s post, the journalist has filed a complaint against the same with the police.

Meet Waman Mhatre former Badlapur Mayor and Mindhe Sena Leader.
Now hear his thoughts, told a woman journalist, you are covering this Badlapur news as if you yourself have been sexually assaulted.
Glad the journalist has refused to take his nonsense and has asked Police to file… pic.twitter.com/RqP0S0ABs1

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) August 20, 2024

Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray called for a fast-track trial, alleging that the school involved in the case had ties to BJP leaders. He criticised the government for failing to protect women despite promoting initiatives like the Mukhyamantri Ladki Bahin scheme, which provides a monthly amount to women of Maharashtra to encourage their empowerment. Thackeray further condemned the politicization of crimes against women, particularly in targeting certain states.

NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) Lok Sabha MP Supriya Sule questioned the delay in registering the FIR and demanded an inquiry into the police’s inaction. Sule had incidentally not spoken on the recent horrific gang rape of a woman doctor at a hospital in Kolkata.

In addition to question the conduct of the Maharashtra police, many opposition leaders also pointed finger at the ruling state government’s decision to appoint Nikam as the public prosecutor in the Badlapur case. Allegation of the school where the incident took place being run by people associated with the BJP were also raised.

Congress leader Aslam Shaikh criticised the state government, highlighting the increase in crime, particularly against women, in Thane—Chief Minister Eknath Shinde’s own district. Shaikh questioned how the public could trust Advocate Ujjwal Nikam, the special public prosecutor appointed to the case, given his recent affiliation with the BJP. He demanded accountability from the Chief Minister, stating that the rise in crime rates and the failure to protect women reflected poorly on the government’s leadership.

The police administration’s consistent failure to act until public outrage erupts has led to a complete breakdown of law and order in our state. In the land of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, where women’s safety should be paramount, our mothers and sisters are now vulnerable. The… pic.twitter.com/szIySwCKFk

— Aslam Shaikh, INC (@AslamShaikh_MLA) August 21, 2024

Opposition Leader Vijay Wadettiwar opposed Ujjwal Nikam’s appointment as the public prosecutor in the Badlapur case, arguing that the school’s connection to the BJP and Nikam’s association with the party could compromise the pursuit of justice. Wadettiwar demanded that the trial be expedited and concluded within three months, with the accused facing the death penalty.

महाराष्ट्राला लाजवेल अशी घटना मुख्यमंत्र्यांच्या ठाणे जिल्ह्यात घडली. आरोपींवर कारवाई करणे सोडून न्याय मागणाऱ्या आंदोलकांवर लाठी चार्ज केला गेला.
हे सगळं कोणासाठी?
कोणाला वाचवण्यासाठी?

मुख्यमंत्री आणि गृहमंत्री दोघांनी राजीनामा देऊन महाराष्ट्राची माफी मागावी. महायुती… pic.twitter.com/hTWkY6mwsy

— Vijay Wadettiwar (@VijayWadettiwar) August 21, 2024

Related:

Maharashtra: Swift action on protesters, delayed justice for sexual assault against minors, police priorities need to be questioned

India’s cry for justice: The brutal Kolkata rape-murder of a young doctor has ignited nationwide protests on the eve of the 78th Independence’s Day

The illusion of the glamourous Malayalam cinema falls apart: Justice Hema Committee report provides insight into systematic harassment and exploitation of women actors

Caste and Indifference: Two separate incidents of rape against minor Dalit girls in UP and Bihar receive no media coverage, protest or outrage

The post Maharashtra: Two minor girls sexually assaulted, delay in FIR, failure of accountability, attempts to cover up crime appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On Tuesday, August 20, the entire town of Badlapur, Mahaarshtra was effectively shut down as thousands of demonstrators gathered to express their anger. Protesters blocked railway tracks at the local station and stormed the school building where the alleged sexual abuse had occurred. The accused, a 23-year-old sweeper, reportedly sexually assaulted the young girls in the school’s washroom, sparking deep concern and fury among residents. Notably, the accused, Akshay Shinde, had been appointed on by the school on August 1, 2024 on contractual basis.

This protest in Badlapur comes amid ongoing nationwide demonstrations sparked by the tragic rape and murder of a 31-year-old trainee doctor at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024. (Details can be read here) The young doctor was attacked while on night duty, a crime that has shocked the nation and led to widespread calls for justice. As these protests in Kolkata continue, more cases of sexual violence against women and children, particularly minors, Dalits, and Adivasis, have emerged, intensifying public outrage. (Details can be read here)  The incident in Maharashtra has particularly struck a nerve, as it took place in a school—a place expected to safeguard children’s welfare.

The protest in Badlapur began early in the morning and saw significant participation, including many women. Demonstrators blocked train services between Ambernath and Karjat stations from 10:10 am, demanding swift and severe action against the perpetrator, as well as the introduction of stricter laws in the state to prevent such heinous acts. The protest had already disrupted local services, leading to the diversion of 12 mail express trains and the partial cancellation of 30 local trains. Reports indicated that some protesters resorted to stone-pelting and vandalized the school building where the alleged sexual assault occurred. However, tensions escalated when the Maharashtra police attempted to disperse the crowd around 6 pm, using lathi charges to clear the railway tracks.

In response to the outpouring of people’s anger, the police filed reverse FIRs against the demonstrators, registering complaints against 300 individuals and arresting more than 40 for stone-pelting, disrupting train services, and clashing with police. The arrested individuals are scheduled to appear in court on August 21, 2024.

How did the protest start?

The sexual assault came to light when one of the young victims complained of pain in her private parts. When asked by her parents, she revealed that the accused had inappropriately touched her while she was in the school toilet. Concerned, the parents contacted the family of the girl’s friend, who informed them that their daughter was also fearful of going to school. Both girls were then taken to a local doctor, who confirmed that they had been sexually assaulted.

On Tuesday morning, the parents of the victims staged a silent protest outside the school. At the protest, people were standing with banners demanding for death penalty for the accused. One banner read, “Mukhyamantri Ladki Bahin Yojana. Nahi pahije amhala tumche 1,500 rupaye. Amhala amchi Bahin, aayi, Mulgi surakshit pahije. Yanchi hami dya. Ya Naradhamala fashichi shiksha jhali pahije. (Chief Minister Ladki Bahin Yojana. We don’t need your Rs 1,500. We want our sisters, mothers and daughters to be safe. Give an assurance of this and that the culprit will be published with death penalty).”

However, between 9:30 am and 10:00 am, a large crowd suddenly joined the protest, escalating the situation due to the insufficient police presence. According to a report from Hindustan Times, MNS leader Sangita Chedvankar, who had been leading the protest, quickly left the scene, while Bharatiya Janata Party MLA Kisan Kathore allegedly remained passive as the situation spiralled out of control. The situation further intensified when the protesters vandalized the school where the alleged assault took place and clashed with police at the nearby railway station.

The eruption of the protests

As per multiple media reports, the protest in Badlapur turned violent as agitators vandalised the school where the alleged sexual assault occurred and pelted stones at the Badlapur railway station. Some protesters broke into the school, damaging property by smashing windows, benches, and doors. Videos of the same had gone viral on social media.

Protesters, including many women, blocked railway tracks, leading to the suspension of local train services between Ambernath and Karjat stations around 10:10 am. The disruption caused by the rail roko protest at Badlapur station led to the diversion of 12 long-distance trains to alternate routes, while authorities arranged buses for stranded commuters. Additionally, 30 suburban trains were partially cancelled, and the Railways sought assistance from state and civic transport bodies to provide extra buses. In response to the escalating situation, the Railway Protection Force (RPF) deployed additional personnel at stations along the Kalyan-Karjat section of Central Railway.

Reports suggest that the situation at the protest site soon started deteriorating, with the protestors pelting stones at the police and refusing to vacating the Railway tracks. Reportedly, at least 17 city police officers and eight railway personnel were injured during the protest, according to The Tribune.

As the situation deteriorated, Thane police officials fired warning shots into the air and used tear gas to disperse the large crowd gathered outside the school in Badlapur. In some areas, there were also reports of a lathi charge by the police on protesters. Authorities have arrested many in connection with the violence.

Action undertaken by Maharashtra police to deal with protests, against protestors:

In response to the protests, the Thane police had deployed heavy forces at the protest sites. Meanwhile, Government Railway Police (GRP) Commissioner Ravindra Shisve had made failed attempts to calm the crowd by assuring them that strict action would be taken against the accused. Despite these assurances, the protesters remained resolute, continuing their blockade of the rail lines, which brought Mumbai’s local train services on the Central Line to a standstill for 10 hours.

In response to the unrest, internet services in Badlapur were shut down, and shops were also ordered to shut down, as provided by PTI.

As tensions rose, the police fired tear gas and resorted to a lathi charge on the crowd gathered outside the school and at the railway station. This action further inflamed the situation, leading the protesters to retaliate with stone-pelting. After 10 hours of disruption, train services resumed late at night, following the dispersal of protesters by the police. GRP Commissioner Ravindra Shisve informed the media that the tracks had been cleared and a report would be sent to railway operations to facilitate the resumption of services.

After the crowds were dispersed by force by the police, DCP Manoj Patil of the Railway Police had stated that the situation had stabilized and that railway operations had returned to normal. However, internet services would remain suspended for a few days to prevent the spread of rumors. DCP Sudhakar Pathare confirmed that internet services would be restored once the situation was reassessed. Most schools in the town were closed on August 21, according to local reports.

Statement by the police officials on FIRs against protestors and internet shutdown:

Referring to the diversion and cancellation of trains due to the protests, the Central Railway’s Chief Public Relations Officer (CPRO) issued a statement saying that, “So far, approximately 12 mail express trains have been diverted, and the Koyna Express has been rerouted from near Badlapur back to Kalyan, then towards Karjat via Diva and Panvel. About 30 local trains have been partially cancelled between Ambernath and Karjat-Khopoli. The number is expected to increase significantly during peak hours.”

A senior police official in Badlapur reported that “at least 17 city police personnel, including two officers, were injured when an angry mob attacked them with stones during Tuesday’s protest over the sexual abuse of two young girls.”

The official added that three FIRs have been registered against the miscreants for violating prohibitory orders, armed unlawful assembly, assault, and damage to public property, among other charges. The injured police personnel are receiving treatment at various local hospitals.

The official also confirmed that “a total of 40 individuals have been arrested so far in connection with the stone-pelting and other crimes. Efforts are underway to identify additional offenders by examining CCTV footage and video news clips.”

On August 21, DCP Sudhakar Pathare spoke to the media and stated that internet services in the town were suspended following the protest and subsequent violence. He added, “Internet services will be restored after a review of the situation in the town.”

Related:

India’s cry for justice: The brutal Kolkata rape-murder of a young doctor has ignited nationwide protests on the eve of the 78th Independence’s Day

The illusion of the glamourous Malayalam cinema falls apart: Justice Hema Committee report provides insight into systematic harassment and exploitation of women actors

Caste and Indifference: Two separate incidents of rape against minor Dalit girls in UP and Bihar receive no media coverage, protest or outrage

The post Maharashtra: Swift action on protesters, delayed justice for sexual assault against minors, police priorities need to be questioned appeared first on SabrangIndia.