State CID Transfers Akshay Shinde Encounter Case Files to SIT Following HC Directions

Maharashtra CID to Submit Akshay Shinde Encounter Case Files to SIT as Per Court Order

MUMBAI: The Maharashtra State Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has consented to hand over the investigation files of the Akshay Shinde encounter case to the Special Investigation Team (SIT), as per the directive of the Bombay High Court after its strict observations on its earlier failure to comply with a court order.

This occurred after Lakhmi Gautam, the Joint Commissioner of Police and the leader of the SIT, reported to the court that the CID had declined to provide the required documents despite a clear court directive.

Akshay Shinde, 24, was accused in a high-profile case of sexual assault in Badlapur and was allegedly shot dead by the Thane police on September 23, 2024. He was arrested on August 17, 2024, on charges of sexually assaulting two four-year-old girls at a local school where he was employed as a contractual sweeper.

On April 7, a division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale had formed the SIT to probe the circumstances of Shinde’s encounter. The court directed the State CID to transfer all the case-related documents to the SIT, which was to start its probe after registering a First Information Report (FIR).

In spite of the court’s directive, the CID did not act, and Gautam and top CID officials were summoned to appear personally before the court. In the hearing on Friday, the bench was frustrated with the delay and asked for clarification regarding the intentions of the CID.

This should have been done in the first place,” the bench said. “The investigating officer should have filed an FIR. After the transfer was directed, what prevented you from handing over the papers? Are you not in contempt of court?

The judges also faulted the SIT for failing to report the inaction of the CID to the court. “When the officer knew that the documents were not being handed over, why did he fail to report it to the court?” they asked.

State public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar announced that the CID had been mulling an appeal against the April 7 order to the Supreme Court, on the assumption that the case was sub judice. But the court rejected this rationale, stressing that just submitting a Special Leave Petition (SLP) is not equivalent to a stay on their order. “There is no stay on our order,” explained Justice Gokhale. “The rule of law has to be enforced, regardless of your view regarding the order.”

The bench also asked the CID to respond as to why contempt proceedings must not be initiated for not complying with the court order. “Why were the papers not delivered to the Joint Commissioner?” the judges asked.

Prashant Burde, Additional Director General of Police of the State CID, who was present through video conferencing, assured the court that the documents required would be handed over to the SIT at the earliest.

The court has set the case for hearing next Wednesday as it continues to preside over the hearings involving this high-profile case.