Court orders probe into fake encounter allegation

A city court has ordered an independent probe after a man accused in an Arms Act case alleged that Delhi Police officers illegally detained him, assaulted him and then staged a fake encounter in which he was shot in the leg

A city court has ordered an independent probe after a man accused in an Arms Act case alleged that Delhi Police officers illegally detained him, assaulted him and then staged a fake encounter in which he was shot in the leg. The court also directed that a special commissioner-rank officer look into the allegation that a deputy commissioner of police (DCP) was present during the incident.

The matter will now be taken up after the inquiry report is submitted (Photo for representation)

The order was passed on July 2 by judicial magistrate first class Rahul Jain of Saket Courts while hearing Delhi Police’s application seeking 14-day judicial custody of the accused. A copy of the order has been accessed by HT.

“The matter be put up before Special CP concerned in view of the allegations of the accused that Hemant Tiwari, who is the DCP concerned was present at the spot when allegedly this fake encounter was taking place and a proper enquiry be taken place into the allegations of the accused,” the court said in the order.

When contacted, DCP (southeast) Hemant Tiwari, accused in the plea of having been present when the alleged incident took place, denied all charges. “I was on approved leave. Allegations are false and malicious. Matter is sub judice,” he said.

The July 2 order stressed that the allegations “required an independent probe” and directed that no officer from the concerned district is associated with it.

The court directed that the matter be placed before the Special Commissioner of Police concerned – in this instance, Neeraj Thakur, who did not respond to calls and messages seeking comment.

The case stems from the arrest of 29-year-old Pramod in an Arms Act case. On June 10, Delhi Police released a statement to the press which stated that Pramod, described as a “habitual robber and snatcher” involved in 23 criminal cases, was arrested after a brief exchange of fire in Lajpat Nagar-IV. According to police, a raiding team attempted to apprehend him, but he opened fire while trying to flee. A constable, it added, retaliated in self-defence, shooting him in the right leg before he was arrested. Police said they recovered a country-made pistol, a spent cartridge, seven suspected stolen mobile phones and a motorcycle allegedly used in crimes.

Seeking judicial custody, the prosecution argued that the accused could commit similar offences if released. The investigating officer, appearing through another officer, told the court that the accused “fired upon the police when police had gone to arrest him” and that the police fired in self-defence.

The defence, however, claimed the encounter was staged and sought preservation of CCTV footage from the Sarai Kale Khan bus stand, alleging that Pramod had actually been detained from there at 12.30am on June 10.

The court directed preservation of the location charts of every member of the alleged raiding party and ordered immediate preservation and seizure of CCTV footage and the DVR from the Sarai Kale Khan bus stand. The court further directed that the inquiry be conducted in accordance with the Supreme Court’s guidelines in PUCL vs State of Maharashtra (2014), which governs investigations into police encounter cases, and asked special CP Thakur to consider transferring the investigation to another police station or agency.

The accused alleged before the court that he and a co-accused were picked up from the bus stand, blindfolded and taken to an unknown location near a forest around midnight.

He claimed – as noted in the order – police personnel told him that “he will be encountered today as he has lot of previous involvement”. He further alleged that his head was covered with a cloth before he was taken into a room where he was beaten, hung upside down and assaulted.

“I became almost unconscious and asked for water,” the accused stated. He further claimed that after questioning, “all my cloth were taken away and we were kept in the room without clothes only in undergarments”.

The accused also alleged that men in civilian clothes tied cloth around their necks before taking them away in a vehicle. After travelling for 30 to 40 minutes, they were allegedly made to wear their clothes again and taken to another location where “one police personnel came on a bike and stopped the bike and then purposely dropped the bike on the ground and also threw two helmets on the ground”.

He further claimed that he was made to sit against a wall, had a cloth tied below his right knee, was asked to close his eyes and was then shot in the leg where the cloth had been tied. According to the order, he alleged the same method was used on the co-accused and that “one police official of senior rank may be ACP or DCP namely Hemant Tiwari was also present at the spot”.

The investigating officer rejected the allegation and told the court that the accused first fired four rounds at the police and officers retaliated in self-defence. He also argued that Pramod’s criminal antecedents, including previous Arms Act cases and allegations of assaulting police personnel, showed that he was falsely implicating the officers.

Apart from ordering the inquiry, the court directed jail authorities to provide the accused with proper medical treatment, noting that he was unable to walk and should be provided a wheelchair if necessary. The matter will now be taken up after the inquiry report is submitted.