The Maharashtra government informed the Supreme Court on Wednesday that action has been initiated against some policemen in connection with the mob lynching of three persons including two sadhus in Palghar district in April this year.
A bench comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah was informed by the state government that it had filed an affidavit in the case last month. The affidavit has given a number of details including action against the policemen who were irresponsible towards their duty in the case.
The Maharashtra police had filed an affidavit last month stating that action has been taken against 18 policemen in connection with the Palghar incident from service dismissal to pay cuts. The apex court was hearing a number of petitions including a CBI or NIA probe into the case of brutality against palghar sadhus and their driver.
[During the lockdown in the Covid-19 epidemic, two sadhus from Kandivli in Mumbai were going to attend someone's funeral in Surat district of Gujarat in a car. They were attacked by huge mob under the presence of police on the night of April 16 in the village of Palghar. The persons killed in the incident were identified as 70-year-old Chikne Maharaj Kalpavrikshagiri, 35-year-old Sushil Giri Maharaj and 30-year-old Nilesh Talgade.]
During the hearing through video conference, a petitioner claimed that he had received an affidavit of about one thousand pages of the state police on Tuesday night. The bench commented, "Why is everyone filing a reply at the last minute? The bench also said that the petitioners will be given time to respond to it.
Another petitioner's lawyer said that in this case, one wing of the state is investigating against the other wing and it will not create confidence. "We will consider it," the bench said. We have not read the affidavit. How can we decide today? Let the petitioners file their replies and then we will see.''
The bench said in its order, "The state has filed an affidavit. The petitioners may be allowed to file a reply to the affidavit within two weeks." The bench also listed the matter for November 16.
0 Comments