Act against police inspector for fabricating evidence in murder of tribal: Court
Mysuru: A week after a
Mysuru court
acquitted a tribal man falsely implicated in the murder of his wife, the Mysuru court initiated action against a
police inspector
to conduct a trial for trying to mislead the court of law. A court official confirmed that action will be taken as per the court's direction, and they cannot reveal the administrative matters.
The court, while delivering judgment in the case, stated that action must be taken against the official for allegedly attempting to compromise the justice system. The court directed the chief administrative officer to book the police inspector under sections 194 and 193 of IPC for
fabricating evidence
with intent to procure conviction of a capital offence.
The judge, Gururaj Somakkalavar, in the order, stated that a finding needs to be recorded in such cases, whether a lapse was innocent or blameworthy. Each erring officer must suffer the consequences of his lapses by appropriate departmental action, he stated in his judgment.
Advocate BS Pandu Poojari, who represented tribal Suresha, said they would file an appeal before the appellate court, pressing to book all policemen of the investigating team along with the inspector. A departmental inquiry has been ordered against four police officers, besides booking an inspector for providing fabricated evidence in court, he explained.
On April 1, Suresha's wife, Mallige, was produced before the open court, nearly four years after she was believed to have died, and the trial is ongoing. The court expressed it as a case of serious lapse on the part of police, and felt that the investigating team tried to convict an innocent tribal based on fabricated evidence.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Northeast Delhi riots: After judge's transfer, where does the ‘larger conspiracy' case stand?
Arguments on charge in the Delhi riots 'larger conspiracy' case will have to begin afresh as the judge who had been hearing the case for the last 18 months has been transferred. Out of the 18 accused arrested in the case, 12 have been in jail for over four years. From October to May 2025, five accused — including former JNU student leader Umar Khalid, former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain, Shifa Ur Rehman, and Safoora Zargar — had completed their arguments on charge. The prosecution also completed its arguments during day-to-day hearings. After the remaining persons finished their arguments, the trial of the case would've begun. Family members and lawyers of the accused called the delay a 'punishment'. Shortly after the riots broke out, which left 53 dead and 700 injured, the Delhi Police Special Cell started investigating the alleged conspiracy behind them. During its investigation, it booked the 18 accused under relevant provisions of the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and IPC. The case of the Special Cell was that the riots were the result of a months-long 'deep-rooted' conspiracy allegedly hatched after the Citizenship Amendment Bill got a nod from the Cabinet in December 2019. Between 2020 and 2023, police filed four supplementary chargesheets. With their final chargesheet in June 2023, they marked the completion of their probe into the case. Their case was primarily built on CCTV footage, WhatsApp chats, and statements of protected witnesses. In October 2023, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat of Karkardooma Court had directed that arguments on the charge be conducted on a day-to-day basis. Two months later, ASJ Rawat was transferred and ASJ Sameer Bajpai replaced him. On September 4 last year, the Special Cell officially told ASJ Bajpai that they had completed their investigation. Following this, the judge ordered that arguments on charge would commence from September 5. On May 30 this year, ASJ Bajpai was transferred following a reshuffle of 135 judges across Delhi. 'With the chargesheet of several thousand pages, more than 700 witnesses, other issues and such transfers, we don't know how long it will take. This is very unfortunate. Our sons and daughters are languishing in jail,' said Umar's father, Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas. 'The problem is that section 43(D) of the UAPA lists extremely stringent bail conditions. The judge has to first make up their mind whether a prima facie case is made out or not. For this, arguments on charge need to be complete. It becomes impossible to get bail otherwise,' said advocate Rajiv Mohan, who represented Husain in court. Along with Mohan, advocate Tara Narula also appeared for Husain. Asif Iqbal Tanha, one of the six accused out on bail, told The Indian Express, 'For the people who are in jail, the delay in trial is very problematic. But even those who are out on bail have various restrictions.' On June 2, ASJ Lalit Kumar, who replaced ASJ Bajpai, heard the case for the first time. The Delhi Police and the accused persons were directed by the judge to furnish their schedule regarding the time frame and manner in which they will address arguments. The court also stated that arguments on charge must be 'expedited'. On June 6, ASJ Kumar asked the prosecution and the defence how long they would take to conclude the arguments. 'I will take 25-27 hours to outline the entire conspiracy… we have submitted a 1,200-page compilation. For the assistance of the honorable Court, I will keep it very concise,' Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad had said. The 18 accused persons in this case are Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, Ishrat Jahan, Faizan Khan, Safoora Zargar, Asif Iqbal Tanha (all six on bail); Tahir Husain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Sharjeel Imam, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Athar Khan (all 12 in jail).
India Today
5 hours ago
- India Today
Caught on camera: Restaurant vandalised over delay in food service in Ghaziabad
Panic broke out late Saturday night at a restaurant in Ghaziabad when a group of armed men stormed in and vandalised the premises, causing chaos amongst diners, including women and children. The incident occurred in the Rajnagar Extension area at a restaurant called Apni Rasoi around 11:30 to the FIR filed by the restaurant owner, Akshit Tyagi, the ruckus began over a delay in food service. Initially, there was a heated exchange of abuses. A few hours later, around 6–7 individuals arrived on motorcycles and a WagonR taxi and attacked the restaurant wielding sticks, rods and the violent attack, the men allegedly damaged two laptops, an LED screen, and a billing machine. They also reportedly took Rs 1,760 from the billing counter. At the time of the incident, several families, including women and children, were dining at the restaurant. Frightened by the sudden violence, they fled the scene to save their lives. WATCH: The entire episode was captured on the restaurant's CCTV cameras, which police are now examining to identify the culprits. Tyagi also alleged in his complaint that some of the accused had previously visited the restaurant on June 6, drunk and involved in a brawl, but the matter was settled that of three accused have come to light - Mintu Tyagi, Rajdeep, and Ravi Sharma. Based on the complaint, an FIR has been registered under IPC sections 352 (assault or use of criminal force), 115(2), 324(4), 351(3), and 309(6).Police are now scrutinising the CCTV footage to identify and arrest the accused. Further investigation is Watch
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
MP HC commutes murder charge to culpable homicide, orders release of accused
Bhopal: A division bench of the Madhya Pradesh high court reduced the charge of murder against a woman accused of killing her husband to culpable homicide. The charge against her wife of father's elder brother (tai) was also reduced likewise, while her brother's wife was absolved of the charge. The accused, Rajkumari, and two other women from her parental family were found guilty of the murder of Rajkumari's husband by a sessions court at Sagar and sentenced to life. Since the wife was in jail for 10 years and her tai remained in jail for 9 years before being released on bail, the court stated that they already served the sentence for culpable homicide and should be released from jail forthwith. Rajkumari was charged with murder for throwing boiling water on her husband, causing his death during treatment. Her bhabhi, Rati, and tai, Ramsakhi, were co-accused in the case. In their criminal revision petition, Rajkumari and Ramsakhi argued that the deceased died after being discharged from the hospital following treatment. They contended that, at worst, they could be convicted for culpable homicide and not murder. On the other hand, Rajkumari's bhabhi, Rati, argued that the deceased did not name her in his dying declaration, so she should be absolved of the charge altogether. The bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Anuradha Shukla found that Rajkumari's husband died 10 days after being discharged from the hospital due to septicemia, and Rati's name does not appear in the names taken by the deceased in his dying declaration. The court reduced the charges against Rajkumari and Ramsakhi to culpable homicide under section 304 of the IPC from section 302 and acquitted the third accused.
