WALI AHMED Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SERIOUS concern shown by the Courts and strict measures to check custodial death or use of criminal force during investigation/interrogation, has not deterred the police force to mend its way and go in for scientific investigation of a crime. Use of violence by police sometime leading to death has apparently gone unabated, despite concerns having been expressed by various Courts in this regard from time to time. The facts in the present case are indicative of a custodial death, though police has made elaborate and detailed efforts to give it a colour of crime on the part of the deceased boy, who has lost his life at the young age of about 17 years. The case of alleged custodial death has apparently come to the notice of this Court on the basis of telegram initiated by Wali Ahmed, a resident of Gurgaon, alleging that his minor son, named Ali Mohammad, was picked up by the police on 26.1.2012 at about 3 P.M. from Khandsa road. The telegram initiated on 3.2.2012 and received in the Chief Justice Secretariat of this Court on 8.2.2012, was put up on the judicial side and was treated as Criminal Writ Petition No.286 of 2012. The contents of the telegram may need reproduction for easy assimilation of the allegations made:-

(2.) IT may need a notice here that subsequently the petitioner initiated another telegram on 29.2.2012, which was received on 1.3.2012, where he has alleged that his son has been murdered and this telegram was in continuation of the earlier telegram dated

(3.) THIS also did not impress the Court and it found huge gaps and holes in the story. The Court then passed a detailed order as the reply revealed a death of a young boy, who had reportedly died at a hospital, which was sought to be linked to the use of fire arm by complainant, Leeladhar. The police was not only found to be too prompt in coming up with this response but was further quick in investigating and solving this FIR at supersonic speed. This FIR appeared to be a procured complaint as the minute analysis of the facts and allegations would ultimately reveal. This Court, after noticing the facts in detail as reflected in the reply, passed the following order on 16.2.2012:-