Delhi High Court Upholds FIR In Alleged Fake Encounter Case

The Delhi High Court has reiterated the mandatory requirement to register an FIR when a person dies, emphasizing that extrajudicial killings must be thoroughly and independently investigated. The court made this observation while dismissing Delhi Police’s appeal against a lower court order, which directed the registration of an FIR against the police raiding team involved in the 2013 encounter death of Rakesh.

Court Questions Encounter Circumstances

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while upholding the lower court’s decision, highlighted inconsistencies in the police’s account of the encounter. The court noted that the vehicle’s tyres were not deflated, despite claims that the police fired at them. Instead, the shots were aimed at the car’s window pane. The court also pointed out that no police officer was injured, despite claims that the suspects had fired at them. The court stressed the need for a proper investigation to determine whether Rakesh’s death was a case of murder or a legitimate encounter.

Legal Protection Not Absolute

The court rejected the police’s argument that no criminal investigation could be conducted against public officers without sanction under Section 197 CrPC. The court clarified that this legal protection applies only to acts performed by public servants in the discharge of official duties.

Father Alleges Intentional Killing

The deceased’s father had lodged an FIR under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging that his son was intentionally killed by the police. He claimed that none of the three accused, who were allegedly fleeing in a car, fired at the police, and no officers were injured. He further alleged that the police brutally beat his son before firing at the car to cover up the crime.

Police Claim Self-Defense

The police countered that the incident had been thoroughly investigated by the SDM, who concluded that the officers fired in self-defense. The court, however, emphasized that these claims required further investigation to ensure justice.

Also Read: Supreme Court To Rule On Manish Sisodia’s Bail Plea On August 9