After HC rap, SIT to probe man's death in Banbhoolpura violence
After HC rap, SIT to probe man's death in Banbhoolpura violence
Nainital, An SIT headed by a Nainital senior police official has been set up in line with the Uttarakhand High Court order over the death of one Faheem during Banboolpura riots in February last year.
Faheem allegedly died of gunshot wounds sustained during the violence in Banbhoolpura area of Haldwani following the demolition of a madrasa and a place built within its boundaries to offer namaz.
Expressing dissatisfaction with the police's investigation into Faheem's death, the high court recently ordered the SIT to take over the probe.
The SIT was set up in compliance with the order, police informed a division bench of Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Alok Mehra on June 19.
Headed by Superintendent Jagdish Chandra, the SIT comprises Circle Officer Nitin Lohani, Sub-Inspector Pramod Pathak and two other officers, the police added.
The bench said the director general of police and the home secretary would provide all necessary facilities to the team.
The SIT was directed to submit a monthly progress report to the court.
The high court was acting on a PIL filed by the victim's brother Parvez who called it a murder and sought a CBI probe.
The bench previously termed the police investigation “strange and questionable” and ordered the transfer of Investigating Officer Neeraj Bhakuni outside the district.
The court was informed that Bhakuni was transferred to Pithoragarh district.
During a previous hearing, the high court made stern remarks in the manner the investigation was carried out.
Even the word "shocking" falls short for the police report, it said.
This must be a unique and possibly the only investigation report of its kind in the country in which the investigating officer acted as a ballistic expert, defense counsel, and judge, the court said.
The bench observed that the investigating officer submitted the final report while deciding the fate of the case he investigated.
The court found it the "only case in the country" in which the investigating officer ignored the statements of eyewitnesses who saw armed assailants, and instead relied on the statements of non-eyewitnesses to file a closure report.
The high court then decided to closely monitor the case.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
