|  | 


Supreme Court Reopens Murder Case Against BJP MLA, Says UP Investigation Is ‘Farce’


On Monday, the Supreme Court reopened a murder investigation against an MLA BJP from Uttar Pradesh, calling the state police investigation a “sham”.

The court dismissed the clean note delivered to the MLA Sushil Singh and ordered a further investigation into the murder of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) leader Ram Bihari Chaubey in 2015; he also decided to monitor the probe.

The SC bench, headed by Judge Rohinton F. Nariman, ordered the formation of a special investigation team (SIT) for the case and appointed an officer from the Police Service of India, Satyarth Anirudh Pankaj, to head the team. .

The sentence, drawn up by Judge Navin Sinha, severely accused the police for the way the case was hastily closed after the Supreme Court took up the petition filed by the son of the murdered BSP leader. Chaubey’s son, who also petitioned the Allahabad high court earlier, cited loopholes in the investigations, adding that the police effort was only to save Singh, an MLA from Saiyadraja (Chandauli). “The FIR was registered on December 4, 2015. Eight investigating officers were changed. An investigation that has been pending since then was promptly closed on January 30, 2019 after this Court gave notice on September 7, 2018, ”said the magistrate.

He added: “The investigation appears to be a sham, designed to hide more than to investigate. We are required to put on the record that the investigation and the closure report are extremely casual and superficial in nature. The investigation and closure report does not contain any material regarding the nature of the investigation against the other defendants, including Defendant No. 5 (Singh), for conspiracy to reach the conclusion of insufficient evidence against him.

The court tore up police reports trying to close the case against Singh because Chaubey’s children had not presented any substantial evidence against the MLA.

“The police have the primary duty to investigate upon receiving a report of the commission of a recognizable crime. This is a duty established by law in the Code of Criminal Procedure, in addition to being a constitutional obligation to ensure that peace is maintained in society and the rule of law is maintained and applied. To say that it was not possible to deepen the investigation because the informant (children) had not provided the adequate materials to investigate, in our opinion, is an absurd statement, coming from the police, ”said the court. He stressed that, although it is up to the police to investigate, if the police fail to fulfill their statutory duty in accordance with the law or are negligent in the performance of their duty, the court cannot abdicate their duties. “A fair investigation is but a necessary concomitant of Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution of India and this Court has an inescapable obligation to ensure the adherence of the police” added the court.

MLA Singh said the charges against him were politically motivated. “However, there is an order from SC and we will cooperate with investigators …”

Original source