The Bombay High Court on Monday expressed strong dissatisfaction with the Maharashtra Criminal Investigation Department’s (CID) handling of the investigation into the death of Akshay Shinde, who was accused of sexually assaulting minors and was killed in an alleged police encounter on September 23. Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan highlighted multiple shortcomings in the CID’s approach, particularly noting the absence of gunshot residue on Shinde’s hands and the lack of fingerprints on a water bottle provided to him as “unusual.”
During the proceedings, the court criticized the CID for its slow pace in gathering and submitting necessary evidence to the magistrate, who is mandated to conduct an inquiry into any case of custodial death. “Our endeavor is to find out the truth. We want a fair probe,” the bench stated, emphasizing the importance of a thorough and transparent investigation.
The incident, which occurred at the Mumbra Bypass in Thane district, involved Shinde allegedly snatching a gun from a police officer while being transported from Taloja jail to Badlapur as part of another case investigation. According to police reports, Shinde fired three shots and was subsequently killed in retaliatory firing. However, the forensic details brought before the court, including the lack of gunshot residue and fingerprints, raised significant doubts about the circumstances of the encounter.
The court was particularly perplexed by the forensic report that failed to detect any fingerprints on the twelve water bottles examined, questioning the credibility of the police account. This led the justices to question the CID’s diligence and thoroughness in investigating the case.
Justice Dere remarked on the seriousness with which the investigation was being taken, pointing out that the magistrate’s role was limited to determining whether the death was custodial. “If the police do not even submit the proper material, then how will the magistrate do its job?” she questioned.
The court directed the CID to expedite the investigation, ensuring that all relevant materials are submitted to the magistrate within two weeks. It also scheduled a further hearing on December 2 to review the progress of the case.
