Mumbai: The Bombay High Court was informed on Monday that the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) ought to have registered a First Information Report (FIR) in the alleged encounter of the Badlapur sexual assault accused after his parents lodged a written complaint raising suspicion in their son’s death.
The submission was made by senior advocate Manjula Rao who was appointed as amicus curiae (friend of the court) to assist on legal issues, including whether an FIR should be registered based on the magistrate’s report indicting the police in the alleged custodial killing of Akshay Shinde. The State had contended that the magistrate’s report was merely recommendatory.
During the hearing, Rao submitted, “Once information is given to the CID, it is necessary for them to register an FIR if a cognisable offence is disclosed. The fact remains that an FIR has to be registered. After investigation, the police can decide whether to file a chargesheet or a closure report.”
A bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Neela Gokhale had appointed Rao as amicus curiae after Shinde’s parents expressed their unwillingness to pursue the case further.
Rao argued that an investigation into a cognisable offence cannot commence unless an FIR is registered. “Filing an FIR is a condition precedent for criminal investigation to proceed. Even the slightest information of a cognisable offence mandates police action. The police have no discretion in lodging an FIR but only in deciding the course of investigation — whether to file a chargesheet or a closure report,” she said, citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Lalita Kumari case, which underscores the importance of registering an FIR in custodial death cases.
She further pointed out that Shinde’s parents had lodged a written complaint on September 24, 2024, raising suspicions about his death. By September 25, 2024, the case had been transferred from the Crime Branch to the State CID, and by October 3, 2024, the High Court had recorded the Advocate General’s statement that the transfer had been effected.
“When the parents submitted written information about a suspicious death, it was sufficient for the police to initiate an investigation. The State CID should have registered an FIR and proceeded accordingly,” Rao asserted.
The State Government, however, has remained non-committal on lodging an FIR against the policemen implicated in Shinde’s death. However, On March 5, it challenged before the High Court the Thane Sessions Court’s order that had kept the magistrate’s findings “in abeyance”.
Senior counsel Amit Desai, representing the government, maintained that an independent inquiry was underway by the State CID, alongside a separate probe by a committee headed by retired Allahabad High Court judge D.B. Bhosale. He argued that the State would take a decision only after the CID concludes its investigation.
Shinde, the accused in a sexual assault case involving minor girls at a local school, was arrested by the Badlapur police. While lodged in Taloja Prison, he was taken into police custody on September 23, 2024, under a transfer warrant for a separate case filed by his wife. During transit, he allegedly sustained firearm injuries and later succumbed to his wounds.
The magistrate’s inquiry report, dated January 17, 2025, raised serious doubts over the policemen’s claim that Shinde had attempted to snatch a firearm, forcing them to open fire in self-defence.
The magistrate found that the officers, including two inspectors, were in a position to control the situation, and the use of force was not justified. The High Court will continue hearing arguments on Tuesday, March 11.
