The Supreme Court has consented to hear a petition requesting the filing of a criminal case against police officials under whose custody a 32-year-old man died in 2013 in Faridabad district, Haryana. A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and PB Varale has issued a notice to the Haryana government and the state's director general of police regarding the petition filed by Anand Rai Kaushik, the brother of the deceased. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on July 26.
Anand Kaushik, through his advocate Rahul Gupta, has contested the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated November 28 of the previous year. The high court had rejected his plea for the registration of a criminal case and the transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation or another investigative agency.
The petitioner alleges that his brother, Satender Kaushik, died while in the custody of the NIT police station in Faridabad on July 25, 2013. Anand Kaushik also asserts that his brother was taken into police custody without any FIR against him based on a hotel manager's complaint regarding an alleged unpaid bill. However, the police claim that the victim died by hanging himself from a window in the police station's toilet.
The petitioner argues that the high court made errors in fact and law when it dismissed the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for directing an investigation into the matter, given that it was admittedly a custodial death. Furthermore, he contends that Satender Kaushik's custody was unlawful as no FIR was registered in the case.
He asserts that the high court should have recognized that the death occurred in police custody and that neither an FIR was registered nor a proper investigation conducted. On November 28 of the previous year, the high court noted that an order was passed on March 11, 2015, by a co-ordinate bench after reviewing the judicial inquiry report, all relevant daily diary reports of the police station, and the postmortem report prepared by a board of doctors. It was apparent that there was no foul play in the present case, and it was not necessary to register an FIR to initiate an investigation, the high court noted.
The high court's order also noted that the co-ordinate bench had taken a lenient view and directed the payment of compensation as the death had occurred in police custody. However, the petitioner refused to accept the compensation amount from the District Legal Service Authority, Faridabad, and also from the National Human Rights Commission.
The high court noted, "Apart from that, the petitioner never challenged the order dated March 11, 2015, passed by this court, whereby this court had observed that no foul play had taken place in the present case and the prayer of the petitioner to get the FIR registered with a view to initiate the investigation was specifically declined by this court. Only an application was filed after three years, on December 7, 2018, for recalling the order dated March 11, 2015, passed by this court."
While dismissing the plea for the registration of a criminal case, the high court stated that such an application for reviewing the order dated March 11, 2015, was not at all maintainable and that too without any lawful justification as no reasons were mentioned in the said application for recalling the order passed by this court.
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
