Today, On 8th October, In the MP custodial death case, the Supreme Court slammed the CBI, asking, “Why didn’t you arrest them earlier, why wait for a court order?” The Court criticized the delay in apprehending absconding police officers involved in the incident.
The Supreme Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to clarify why it did not arrest two police officers implicated in the custodial death of a 25-year-old tribal youth in Madhya Pradesh prior to the Court’s orders.
A Bench consisting of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan also asked the State government to report on any departmental actions taken against the suspended officers.
The Court remarked,
“Why couldn’t you arrest them in all these days? This is not how a Supreme Court order is to be complied with. Because we said we will ask Chief Secretary to be present today, you have acted. You explain why this happened. We are not going to close the matter,”
Deva Pardhi, the victim, was allegedly tortured to death by police officials at Myana Police Station in July 2024. His uncle, the sole eyewitness, was also severely beaten and reportedly implicated in multiple cases to undermine his credibility.
Today, Additional Solicitor General Raja Thakare informed the Court that both officers, Uttam Singh and Sanjeev Singh, had been arrested.
The senior counsel on behalf of the CBI, stated,
“We have complied and both of them are arrested. Uttam Singh was arrested in Indore, and Sanjeev Singh was taken into custody in Shivpuri on 5th October,”
However, the Court requested an explanation for why the arrests occurred only after the contempt plea was filed.
The Court ordered,
“We find that the arrest has been made pursuant to the stringent and strong remarks made by this Court. The fact remains that there has been non-compliance of the directions of this court on 15.5.25 and it is only pursuant to the filing of this contempt petition that the arrest has taken place. In the circumstances, we direct the respondents to furnish an explanation as to why the arrests have been made on 27.9.25 and 5.10.25. We adjourn to 6th November for explanation,”
Additionally, Advocate Payoshi Roy, representing the petitioner, noted that following the victim’s death, the police filed seven cases against the eyewitness.
The counsel added,
“In five, he has been granted bail. Two are still pending. The defects have been verified. It should be listed next week,”
In May of this year, the Supreme Court deemed the local investigation flawed, transferred the case to the CBI, and ordered the arrest of the accused within one month. With no progress over the next four months, the victim’s family approached the Court again, filing a contempt plea for the willful disobedience of the Court’s May 15 order, which mandated the immediate arrest of the accused officers.
Earlier, On September 25, the Bench criticized the State for continuing to pay salaries to the absconding inspectors and for delaying their suspension. It also expressed concern for the safety of the sole eyewitness, who is in judicial custody.
Subsequently, the Court was informed that the officers had been suspended and their salaries stayed.
The following day, the Court admonished the Madhya Pradesh government and the CBI again for their failure to arrest the two police officers, granting them one final opportunity to comply with the Court’s directives.
Case Title: Hansura Bai & Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors