The Maharashtra police on Wednesday informed the Bombay High Court that it will register a First Information Report (FIR) by May 3 in the alleged fake encounter of Akshay Shinde, an accused in the Badlapur sexual assault case..The statement was made after the Court sharply criticised the Maharashtra police for its delay in filing an FIR despite clear directive by the Bench.It was further submitted that the Special Investigation Team (SIT), constituted by the High Court on April 7, has nominated Police Inspector Mangesh Desai from the Mumbai Crime Branch as the informant for filing the FIR.Following this assurance, a Bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Neela Gokhale permitted the SIT to collect the sealed magisterial enquiry documents from the court’s registry after the FIR is registered.The magisterial probe had found five police officers responsible for Shinde's death..Earlier in the day, the Bench had sharply criticised the delay and the State's refusal to file an FIR without first examining the magistrate’s findings. The Court pressed the State on whether police were legally empowered to refrain from filing of an FIR when a cognizable offense had already been established.“Can you register FIR based on the statements you receive? You have to apply your mind. How can the [magisterial enquiry] documents help you? They can help you during the course of investigation. Can you rely on the documents to file an FIR?” Justice Mohite-Dere asked..The State, represented by Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, argued that an FIR required the officer's satisfaction of a cognizable offence under Section 154 CrPC and that no complainant had directly approached the SIT. The Court pushed back strongly against that rationale.“The petitioner may come one day and say ‘I withdraw the petition. I don’t want to sit on the death of my son.’ Therefore, will you say that the father has no complaint and you won’t file an FIR?” the bench demanded.“There has to be rule of law. The police are there for a reason—to unearth the truth. There is a responsibility on us and on the police. Don’t let public faith in the system be eroded,” it added.Rejecting the idea that lack of a direct complaint could prevent legal action, the bench said,“We are not saying arrest anyone. But if there is an independent person who comes and complains, you will file the FIR, right? You don’t need to depend only on the statements.”.On the claim that officers could not act without reviewing the magistrate's materials from which an inference of a cognizable offense can be made, the court pointed out:“You are going to conduct your investigation based on the statements of witnesses examined by the magistrate, but not on the statements given before the magistrate? How is that going to help?”Eventually, after repeated prodding and warnings of contempt action, the State gave its assurance that an FIR will be filed, following which the Court outlined the process for transferring the enquiry documents. .The Registrar (Judicial-I) will open the sealed materials in the presence of a SIT officer, someone from prosecutor's officer, and a representative of the Amicus Curiae. Copies of the all documents and electronic records will have to be made and the originals should be transferred to the SIT, the Court directed. It also ordered the State to ensure that the materials are forwarded to the Judicial Commission overseeing the matter.
