Uttam Nagar murder case: SC declines to intervene in ongoing probe

The Supreme Court declined to intervene in the Tarun Butolia murder case but directed Delhi Police to ensure the victim's family's safety and address concerns.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to intervene in the ongoing investigation into the killing of 27-year-old Tarun Butolia in Hastsal village in west Delhi’s Uttam Nagar on March 4, but directed the Delhi Police to make all necessary arrangements to ensure the safety of the victim’s family.

The court was hearing a petition filed by lawyer Hari Shankar Jain, which sought directions including compensation and protection for the deceased’s family. (Hindustan Times)

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justices Joymala Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi said the Delhi Police could address concerns relating to the safety and security of the victim’s family and granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation before the police commissioner. It added that if the petitioner remained unsatisfied with the response, he could then approach the Delhi High Court.

“Directions sought concerning untimely death of a 27-year-old individual. We find some directions are administrative in nature concerning safety and security of victim family. Delhi police can look into it. We grant liberty to submit a comprehensive representation before the commissioner of police. There is no gainsaid that if police finds threat perception remedial measures will be taken. If not addressed, then petitioner may move Delhi HC,” the court said.

During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel Vishnu Shankar Jain referred to the apex court’s 2018 judgment in Tehseen Poonawalla v Union of India, which listed steps for the state to prevent mob violence. The bench, however, expressed reluctance to issue any directions, including transferring the probe to the CBI.

“Every day CBI people come here and raise their hands and say their plate is full. Delhi Police is a professional force. Why to demoralise them? Yes, if police need to be sensitised etc., you can approach the commissioner of police first,” the court observed.

In its order, the court noted that several directions sought by the petitioner fell within the “administrative” domain.

Jain had approached the court following the March 4 altercation in Uttam Nagar’s Hastsal village, where a dispute over a water balloon escalated into violence between two groups.

Butolia suffered injuries in the clash and died the following day. Police have since arrested 14 people and detained several others, while authorities have deployed heavy police presence in the area to maintain order in the light of communal tension.

On March 19, the Delhi High Court had directed police to ensure peace and security ahead of Eid on March 21.

In his petition, Jain claimed the incident was a planned act of communal violence. He sought police protection for the deceased’s family and urged the court to direct the state to award ₹5 crore compensation. He further sought implementation of the 2018 Poonawalla guidelines, arguing that had they been enforced, the incident would not have taken place.

The 2018 judgment had held that mob lynching constitutes a direct assault on the rule of law, issuing binding directions to states across preventive, remedial, and punitive measures. These include appointing nodal police officers in every district, acting against those spreading hate, registering FIRs under relevant provisions, creating victim compensation schemes, and ensuring time-bound investigations.