Today, On 25th September, The Supreme Court slammed the Madhya Pradesh government and the CBI in a custodial death case, stating “All your efforts are eyewash,” as both failed to suspend absconding policemen despite knowing they were on the run since April.
The Supreme Court criticized the Madhya Pradesh government and the CBI for their failure to suspend absconding police officials involved in a custodial death case, warning of potential contempt actions.
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan noted that the accused police officials had been on the run since April without any suspension.
The court was addressing a contempt petition filed by the victim’s mother, who alleged that the authorities had not complied with a Supreme Court order from May 15, which mandated transferring the investigation from the Madhya Pradesh Police to the CBI.
The local police were found to have attempted a cover-up and influenced the investigation into the victim’s death.
The CBI’s counsel informed the court that the two officers were suspended on Wednesday.
The bench responded,
“Why yesterday? You say they are absconding since April. This means you are protecting them. Now this is really contempt. You have been searching for them since April; why haven’t you suspended them? What is the meaning of this? All your efforts are eyewash.”
The CBI lawyer stated that attempts were being made to trace the financial activities of the police officials and that their vehicles were being tracked at highway tolls. He added that social media accounts had been examined and a cash reward was offered, but no significant leads had surfaced.
The bench inquired about the anticipatory bail hearings for the police officials,
“Have you gone and spoken to the advocate who appeared for him? Wasn’t the state involved in the anticipatory bail? What did the government pleader advise? They could have arrested him.”
The court emphasized,
“This is contempt of Supreme Court order by the state of Madhya Pradesh. Officers are not coming on duty for so many months, and you keep silent?” The Supreme Court deemed the CBI’s status report unsatisfactory and summoned the respondents to appear the following day.
The bench clarified that there was no order stating that only the CBI could make arrests.
It stated to the representative of the state government,
“If an officer of your government is involved, you cannot wash your hands of it,”
The Supreme Court scheduled another hearing for Friday and required the state government counsel and the home secretary to provide an explanation.
Earlier, the bench had reprimanded the CBI for not apprehending the absconding officers, directing them to arrest the two accused within a month. The court warned that it would not tolerate any harm coming to the victim’s uncle, who is the sole eyewitness and currently in judicial custody.
Justice Nagarathna remarked,
“We will only say your helplessness appears to be the garb of protection. This can’t go on like this. Despite a Supreme Court express order, you are unable to act. You are pleading helplessness. They are absconding, a proclamation is there, and yet you can’t trace and arrest them. Please don’t plead helplessness,”
The bench expressed concern for Gangaram Pardhi, the victim’s uncle, stating it did not want a repeat of a custodial death. The CBI was questioned regarding its failure to arrest the two officers, Sanjiv Singh Mawai and Uttam Singh Kushwaha, who have been evading capture since April.
The CBI counsel noted that non-bailable warrants had been issued against them, and they had been declared proclaimed offenders, with applications filed for the attachment of their property.
It was highlighted that the two officers had been fleeing even before the CBI took over the case. The counsel mentioned that raids and digital surveillance had been conducted, but the officers remained at large.
The victim was detained in connection with a theft case alongside his uncle, Gangaram, who is in judicial custody, while Deva’s mother alleged that her son was tortured and killed by the police, who contended that he died of a heart attack.