Two years after 19-yr-old died of 57 stab wounds, SC asks DGP to investigate

The relative of the boy, who was killed over a property dispute in Umargaon, had approached SC alleging police inaction after HC turns down plea to transfer case to CBI
By Yogesh Avasthi
Posted On Wednesday, September 16, 2009 (Ahmedabad Mirror : http://www.ahmedabadmirror.com/index.aspx?Page=article&sectname=News%20-%20City&sectid=3&contentid=20090916200909160301242651566ca04)
In yet another case that questions the integrity of the Gujarat police, the Supreme Court has asked the Director General of Police to nominate an officer who will investigate the 2007 killing of a 19-year-old boy in Valsad and report to the court directly.

Acting upon a petition filed by Valsad-based Dilip Patni, who had expressed his dissatisfaction with the probe conducted by Valsad police and cited several discrepancies in the panchanamas and victim’s post-mortem report, the SC directed the Crime Branch Criminal Investigation Department (CBCID) to file a status report within two months.

The DGP has appointed VV Rabari, additional DIG of the Crime Branch, to conduct the probe. As directed by Justice S B Sinha and Justice Deepak Verma on August 7, Rabari shall record the statements of the petitioner and give him an opportunity to point out the discrepancies.

“As per the Supreme Court’s guidelines, we have begun a fresh inquiry into the case,” Rabari told Mirror.
The murder

Patni’s nephew Rahul alias Samir, 19, had disappeared from their residence on July 15, 2007. The next day, his body, bearing 57 stab wounds, was found from the bank of Varoli river in Umargaon.

In an FIR, Patni named seven people — Vijay Agarwal, Jigesh Tanna, Jack alias Jagdish, Vinod Vaghela, Vaghela’s brother Anjan, two fishermen and their accomplice — as accused, stating Rahul was the victim of an ongoing property dispute.

The Umargaon police had arrested only Agarwal, who was the family’s domestic help, as Patni alleged the others were highly influential people.

Petition in High Court

Since no other arrests were made, Patni approached the High Court within a week of the murder. In his petition, he alleged that the Valsad DSP, DySP and the Umargaon police sub-inspector harassed his family members and threatened to kill them if they voiced any grievance against the department or the accused at the Sessions court, where the trial had commenced.

He also pointed out discrepancies in the various panchnamas of the scene of offence drawn on different days as well as in the post-mortem report and the Cause of Death certificate. Patni pleaded before the HC that the case be, therefore, transferred to the CBI.

HC judgment

However, the HC, in its judgment on June 18, 2008, struck down his request stating “in the entire petition, there is not even a whisper as to what are the special circumstances that would justify investigation through the CBI, except for voicing an apprehension that the accused persons named by him in the FIR are influential people...”

The court dismissed the petition saying Patni could file an appropriate application seeking further investigation at the sessions court.

Not satisfied with the ruling, Patni then approached the Supreme Court. Armed with the interim order of the SC, Patni is hopeful justice will be delivered to him. “The cops have been protecting the accused, some of whom belong to the BJP.

“They have even connived with the doctors who are yet to conducted a proper postmortem of the body. The police department has even promoted some of these investigating cops. We are hopeful the Supreme Court will get us justice,” Patni said.
The cops have been protecting the accused, some of whom belong to BJP. They have even connived with the doctors who are yet to conduct a proper post-mortem of the body – Dilip Patni, victim’s uncle

SC take on Gujarat police in Sohrabuddin case

On Thursday, September 10, a SC bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Aftab Alam, suggested a probe by SIT in Sohrabuddin encounter could be in the offing as the “objectivity and integrity of the investigation has been questioned”.

Justice Alam said: “The question of referring the matter to the SIT has arisen as there have been allegations that the investigations by the Gujarat police are just an eyewash and an attempt to cover up the conspiracy in the case.Till now, you have not explained how Kausar Bi was killed. Her manner of death is unknown.”