New Delhi: In a blow to the Uttar Pradesh police, the Supreme Court on Monday reopened a 2015 murder case involving BJP MLA Sushil Singh as an accused after a closure report had been filed in the case.
Terming the probe as a mere “sham”, a bench of Justices Rohinton Nariman, Navin Sinha and Krishna Murari came down heavily on the state police, observing that the investigation had been carried out only “to conceal more than to investigate”.
The court issued an order constituting a special investigation team (SIT) headed by IPS officer, Satyarth Anirudh Pankaj, to restart the probe. The SIT will submit its report in two months.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Amar Nath Chaubey, the son of the victim, Ram Bihar Chaubey. Ram Bihar was shot dead in his village Shrikanthpur in Varanasi in December 2015. Amar Nath’s petition challenged the Allahabad high court’s rejection of his plea to transfer the case to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The case
To begin with the police in its case dairy had mentioned that as per the police informer, BJP MLA Singh had paid a token amount of Rs 5 lakh to those who had shot at Ram Bihar Chaubey and that a political rivalry had existed between Singh and the deceased.
However, the closure report filed by the police concluded that there was no concrete evidence to establish that Singh had indeed conspired to kill Ram Bihar.
Also read: UP Police Is Now Disregarding Adityanath’s Orders and Helping a Cop Get Away With Murder
Unsatisfied by the probe, petitioner Amarnath Chaubey alleged that eight investigation officers were changed during the course of the investigation to point out that there had been efforts to tamper with the evidence. He specifically alleged that the current station house officer at Chaubeypur police station in Varanasi was “trying to eliminate and destroy all evidence against the said accused”.
The petitioner also submitted to the court that Singh has had held high political offices in the state and has been accused in 24 criminal cases, and six murder cases are pending against him.
As the affidavit filed by the Uttar Pradesh director general of police (DGP) in the case was not satisfactory, the apex court had sought the closure report of the case on October 26, 2020.
After examining the report, the apex court on Monday said that the “investigation and the closure report are extremely casual and perfunctory in nature”.
Setting aside the closure report, the judges said that the “court cannot abdicate its duties on the precocious plea that investigation is the exclusive prerogative of the police”.
The matter will be taken up for hearing next after the SIT constituted by the court submits its report within the stipulated two-month period.