3 cops held in custodial death case

GOREGAON LYNCHING

 

Mateen Hafeez TNN

Mumbai: The crime branch arrested three policemen attached to the Vanrai police station on Tuesday in the case of custodial death of a 20-year-old suspected thief.

 

    The arrested men were head constable Chandrakant Kambale, police naik Kiran Pingale and constable Umesh Gosavi.
    

The deceased, Manoj Salve, a Kurla resident, and his accomplice Prakash Chavan (30) were caught by the public at a fire safety exhibition on the Nesco ground in Goregaon (E) on October 26, said the police.   Crime branch insiders said the two suspected thieves were beaten by the people present and the three policemen also joined the public in the thrashing. 

    After the suspects were taken to the Vanrai police station, their questioning was commenced, during which Salve fell unconscious. Salve was taken to Cooper Hospital in Juhu, where doctors declared him dead at the time of arrival.  When Salve’s family heard about his detention and subsequent death, they demonstrated at the police station. Calling it a murder, they demanded the arrest of the policemen responsible. 

    At the time, the police registered an accidental death case, but the post-mortem report stated that Salve died of external injuries.   The crime branch, which had begun an investigation, submitted its report and stated that the preliminary inquiry had found three policemen guilty. 

    The inquiry team also examined the CCTV footage of the exhibition centre and saw people beating the suspects. The three policemen did not rush the two suspects to hospital, instead taking them to their police station.   Based on the report, the three policemen were arrested on Tuesday night. The accused were produced before a court and remanded in police custody till Monday. 

 

The Times of India, December 26, 2013

‘Thief died in lock-up of earlier injury’

Naushad Khan

Mateen Hafeez TNN

Mumbai: Investigations into the death of a suspected thief, Naushad Khan, in the Chembur police lock-up have revealed that he died because of head injuries sustained before the police picked him up. There were allegations that Khan was tortured to death by two police constables, both of whom were suspended. 

    While crime branch officers have now booked head constable Dilip Sawant and constable Sanjay Dhalethe for voluntarily causing grievous hurt, they maintain that Khan was not tortured to death.  Khan was picked up from his Govandi home on March 15 and taken to the Chembur police lock-up in a theft case.

    Two other accused present in the detection room had alleged that the constables tortured Khan. The police had maintained that he had banged his head against a wall and died of self-inflicted injuries. He was taken to hospital where doctors declared him brought dead.
 

    “A detailed forensic examination of Khan’s viscera showed that there was a lot of alcohol in his stomach on the day he was picked up. We have independent (civilian) witnesses who had seen a drunk Khan fall (before being detained) and sustain severe head injuries. The autopsy report states that he died because of these injuries,” said an officer. The officer had no answer when TOI asked him why the policemen had not taken an injured Khan to hospital before bringing him to the police station.    Khan’s initial autopsy report stated that he was tortured to death as there were deep wounds all over his body. 

 
THE CASE Naushad Khan was picked up from
    his Govandi home on March 15 and taken to the Chembur police lock-up in a theft case. He later died
    Two other accused present in the detection room had alleged that two constables tortured Khan
    The police claimed that Khan died of self-inflicted injuries. The two constables were suspended
    The crime branch has now booked the two cops for voluntarily causing grievous hurt but maintains that Khan was not tortured to death

The Times of India, July 10, 2013

Cop arrested for woman’s suicide in custody

S Ahmed Ali TNN

Mumbai: Sub-inspector Munir Shaikh of the Malwani police station was arrested on Thursdayby thecrimebranch for compelling a woman to commit suicide. He has been remanded in police custody tillApril11.

This is Shaikh’s second arrest in the case. In December 2010, the Malwani police had arrested him under sections 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint), 343 (wrongful confinement for three or more days) and 348 (wrongful confinement to extort confession or compel restoration of property) of the IPC. He was later released on bail of Rs 25,000. A fewdayslater,the victim,Kunda Shinde, succumbed to her injuries, following which the police slapped section 306 (abetment of suicide) on Shaikh. Sincethen,thesub-inspector had been absconding. The case was
later handed over tothecrimebranch.

According to the police, Shaikh had approached the sessionscourtfor anticipatory bail. After it was rejected, he filed a plea in the high court, which, too, did not grant him relief, but told him that he could approach the Supreme Court within 10 days. “On Thursday, he informed the crime branch through an advocate that he wanted to surrender. As soon as he did that, the court sent him to police custody,” said a policeofficer.

The case originated on December 14, 2010, when Rupali Sawant approached the Malwani police station, alleging that Kunda had stolen gold ornaments worth Rs 3 lakh from her house. Shaikh, who was given charge of the matter, called Shinde and her daughter Sonali to the police station and detained them for more than 24hours.

A police officer said Shaikhshouldhave registered an FIR and should have produced the Shindes before a court. But Shaikh released them only on December 16. But on December 21, he detained her again, along with her husband Chindu. This provoked her into hanging herself with a nylon rope insideher cell.

However, an alert constable freed her from the noose in the nick of time. She was admitted to hospital, where she diedon December 31.

“Shaikh detained Shinde and her daughter without registering the arrests or making an entry in the police diary,” an officer said. “If he was not confident about the two being behind the theft, he should have let them go after questioning.”

Munir Shaikh

The Times of India, April 8, 2011

Accused who consumed poison in lock-up dies

CRIME BRANCH PROBE IS ON

Mateen Hafeez TNN

Mumbai: The 21-year-old chain snatcher, who had consumed pesticide in the L T Marg police station’s lock-up on January 15, died in J J Hospital on Friday. The deceased, Shadab Khan’s family has alleged police brutality.

The custodial death case has been transferred to the city crime branch. “We did panchnama in the presence of a magistrate and are investigating the matter,” said a crime branch officer.

Khan is survived by his wife and two daughters. Shehzad Ghachi, another chain snatcher who too consumed pesticide with Khan, is undergoing treatment at JJ Hospital. His condition is said to be critical.

The duo consumed pesticide an hour before they were to be produced before a magistrate
“When an accused is transferred to a lock-up, he should be thoroughly frisked. How come the two accused managed to procure pesticide inside the lock-up?” said a crime branch officer.

The senior police officials at the LT Marg police station were tight-lipped about the case. Senior policemen held a meeting with assistant commissioner of police, Bapu Katakdound, on this issue. Katakdound will now probe how the two suspects managed to take the pesticide inside and whether they were tortured during the interrogation, said police sources.

Khan belonged to the Nagapda area. “On December 24, the Pydhonie police picked up the duo on charges of chain snatching. They seized Shaikh’s bike and framed them,” a relative of Khan said.


The Times of India, January 22, 2011

Sharma spends sleepless night in lock-up

CLOSE ENCOUNTER: Pradeep Sharma at Bandra police station on Friday

Mateen Hafeez | TNN

Mumbai: The Bandra police station witnessed hectic activity on Friday. The toilets were cleaned while the sweepers made the lock-up more habitable before dismissed encounter specialist Pradeep Sharma was sent to a 10x10 cell for allegedly gunning down a suspected gangster Ramnarayan Gupta alias Lakhan Bhaiyya.

Sharma (49), infamous for 107 encounters, is facing the charge of a fake encounter killing. It is alleged that he had killed Ramnarayan Gupta on 11 November 2006 in Versova in a staged encounter. Sharma has featured on the cover of Time magazine and three Hindi movies have been made on his life.

“Soon after the court allowed him home-made food, an acquaintance brought Sharma a tiffin on Friday night. The tiffin was checked by the senior officials at the Bandra police station before being sent to Sharma’s cell,’’ said a police officer.

The cell, where Sharma has been lodged, does not have a fan. “Though there is no light in the cell, a tubelight, hanging in the corridor, covers three cells. Sharma has been kept alone in the cell,’’ informed an officer from the Bandra police station. “He had told the court that there was a threat to his life and so we kept him alone and the two other policemen and two informers arrested along with him were kept in the other cells,’’ the officer said. Soon after he was taken to the police station at around 6 pm, a constable offered him tea. “He was questioned about the case for around 30 minutes and then sent to his cell,’’ the official said.

In the lock-up, Sharma looked restless and did not speak to the guards posted outside the corridor. “He was awake till 4 am and slept on the floor later. He got up at 7 am and used a bathroom meant for common inmates,’’ the officer said. He was given breakfast around 8 am. “Sharma did not ask for any newspaper and, even if he asked, we could not have provided it without the court’s permission,’’ said an officer. Sharma was taken to Bhabha Hospital around 11 am for a medical check-up. His report was normal, officials said.

Post-lunch, Sharma was again questioned by senior police officials. “He does not talk to the policemen much and prefers to keep quiet, but has not complained about anything so far,’’ one of the officials said.

Encounter specialists were encouraged when the judicial system started failing. If proceedings take long, people get fed up. There’s a lot of pressure from the middle class to get quick justice. They support the system of encounter specialists. There is pressure on politicians who in turn put pressure on the police force. No civilised society can have something like an encounter specialist. It’s high time we did away with such a system. It is a complete breakdown of discipline. The word ‘encounter’ means meeting someone suddenly. How could there be a specialist in encounters?
Julio Ribeiro | EX-POLICE COMMISSIONER

The arrests, are a welcome step from the point of view of human rights. Nobody can take the law in their hands. Encounter specialists were giving death penalties on mere suspicion. It was killing without a judicial trial, impermissible in any country governed by the rule of law. Encounter specialists came up because of the protection granted to them by their seniors in the late 1990s. In the current case, Ramprasad Gupta, the brother of the victim, has done an exceptional job. I have gone through his papers; he has done the work of an ace detective.
Y P Singh | IPS OFFICER-TURNED-LAWYER

The Times of India, January 10, 2010

Sharma spends sleepless night in lock-up

CLOSE ENCOUNTER: Pradeep Sharma at Bandra police station on Friday

Mateen Hafeez | TNN

Mumbai: The Bandra police station witnessed hectic activity on Friday. The toilets were cleaned while the sweepers made the lock-up more habitable before dismissed encounter specialist Pradeep Sharma was sent to a 10x10 cell for allegedly gunning down a suspected gangster Ramnarayan Gupta alias Lakhan Bhaiyya.

Sharma (49), infamous for 107 encounters, is facing the charge of a fake encounter killing. It is alleged that he had killed Ramnarayan Gupta on 11 November 2006 in Versova in a staged encounter. Sharma has featured on the cover of Time magazine and three Hindi movies have been made on his life.

“Soon after the court allowed him home-made food, an acquaintance brought Sharma a tiffin on Friday night. The tiffin was checked by the senior officials at the Bandra police station before being sent to Sharma’s cell,’’ said a police officer.

The cell, where Sharma has been lodged, does not have a fan. “Though there is no light in the cell, a tubelight, hanging in the corridor, covers three cells. Sharma has been kept alone in the cell,’’ informed an officer from the Bandra police station. “He had told the court that there was a threat to his life and so we kept him alone and the two other policemen and two informers arrested along with him were kept in the other cells,’’ the officer said. Soon after he was taken to the police station at around 6 pm, a constable offered him tea. “He was questioned about the case for around 30 minutes and then sent to his cell,’’ the official said.

In the lock-up, Sharma looked restless and did not speak to the guards posted outside the corridor. “He was awake till 4 am and slept on the floor later. He got up at 7 am and used a bathroom meant for common inmates,’’ the officer said. He was given breakfast around 8 am. “Sharma did not ask for any newspaper and, even if he asked, we could not have provided it without the court’s permission,’’ said an officer. Sharma was taken to Bhabha Hospital around 11 am for a medical check-up. His report was normal, officials said.

Post-lunch, Sharma was again questioned by senior police officials. “He does not talk to the policemen much and prefers to keep quiet, but has not complained about anything so far,’’ one of the officials said.

Encounter specialists were encouraged when the judicial system started failing. If proceedings take long, people get fed up. There’s a lot of pressure from the middle class to get quick justice. They support the system of encounter specialists. There is pressure on politicians who in turn put pressure on the police force. No civilised society can have something like an encounter specialist. It’s high time we did away with such a system. It is a complete breakdown of discipline. The word ‘encounter’ means meeting someone suddenly. How could there be a specialist in encounters?
Julio Ribeiro | EX-POLICE COMMISSIONER

The arrests, are a welcome step from the point of view of human rights. Nobody can take the law in their hands. Encounter specialists were giving death penalties on mere suspicion. It was killing without a judicial trial, impermissible in any country governed by the rule of law. Encounter specialists came up because of the protection granted to them by their seniors in the late 1990s. In the current case, Ramprasad Gupta, the brother of the victim, has done an exceptional job. I have gone through his papers; he has done the work of an ace detective.
Y P Singh | IPS OFFICER-TURNED-LAWYER

The Times of India, January 10, 2010

Sharma behind slain man’s kidnap

Vijay V Singh | TNN

Mumbai: Dismissed cop and encounter specialist Pradeep Sharma played a key role in the kidnapping of Ramnarayan Gupta, a criminal from Vashi, who was later shot by the police in a fake encounter. That was what deputy police commissioner K M M Prasanna, who heads the special investigating team probing the encounter, told the Andheri metropolitan court on Friday. Sharma, police constables Tanaji Desai and Ratnakar Kamble and police informers Akhil Khan, Hitesh Solanki and Shailendra were remanded in police custody till January 14 by magistrate R K Shaikh.

Gupta was picked up on November 11, 2006, from Vashi and brought near the Nana Nani Park in Versova where he was shot by the D N Nagar police. The police stand was that inspector Pradeep Suryavanshi went to the park and asked Gupta to surrender. The police claimed that Gupta fired, and Suryavanshi and his team retaliated, resulting in his death.

-------------------------------------------

‘My husband’s soul can rest in peace’

Family Of Ramnarayan Gupta Who Was Killed In A Fake Encounter Says They Are Relieved That Justice Is Being Served

S Ahmed Ali | TNN

Mumbai: For advocate Ramprasad Gupta, who is the brother of the deceased Ramnarayan aka Lakhann Bhaiyya, the Special Investigation Team’s (SIT) conclusion that his brother was killed by the police in an alleged fake encounter, is a vindication of his long-fought battle for justice.

“The last three years have been very difficult for my family as we were fighting the system for justice. It was an extremely tough phase of our lives.” said a relieved Gupta.

On November 11, 2006, around 7.30 pm, the team of D N Nagar police led by inspector Pradeep Suryavanshi, inspector Dilip Palande and assistant inspector Arvind Sarvankar, claims to have gunned down Ramnarayan Gupta, an alleged Chhota Rajan aide in Andheri. But Ram Prasad insisted that his brother had been kidnapped by plainclothes policemen that evening, and moved the Bombay High Court for justice.

“All my opponents were police officers who were highly connected. We had to move my brother’s wife Subhalaxmi out of the city for security reasons. We were concerned about her safety. She has a son and schoolgoing daughter,” said Gupta, who makes no bones about the fact that his brother did indeed have a criminal past.

“Yes, my brother was a criminal. But that was in the past. He had been rehabilitated successfully, and was living a normal life when he was murdered,” Gupta added.

Within a week of the encounter, Gupta filed a complaint in the High Court seeking a judicial probe. The day his brother had been gunned down, Gupta said he sent a telegram to the Mumbai police commissioner’s office alleging that a couple of plainclothes policemen had kidnapped Gupta.

“Even when Magistrate R A Shaikh was conducting judicial inquiry, she had been threatened by Suryavanshi. Initially, I was afraid. I couldn’t help but think what they would do to me if they had no qualms about threatening a magistrate,” said Gupta.

Support from friends who stood by the family through these trying times, he added, gave them the strength to keep fighting. Ramnarayan’s wife Subhalaxmi is happy that the wheels of justice are moving in the right direction. “Now, my husband’s soul can rest in peace,” she reportedly told Gupta over phone when she heard the news of the arrests that were made.

Advocate Shyam Marwari, who represented Gupta in court, said: “The investigation was handled by the SIT head by DCP Prasanna who is reporting to the high court.”

‘He has had a chequered career spanning more than 2 decades’
Mumbai: Controversy has dogged the footsteps of inspector Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma whose meteoric rise from a sub inspector to an encounter specialist in a little over 23 years is well known. He hails from a village in Dhulia, Maharashtra, where his father Rameshwar Sharma worked as a school principal. It is believed that Sharma got his first “taste’’ of the underworld and the Chhota Rajan gang when he was assigned to the anti-narcotic cell in Bandra. There was a time when he was on good terms with former top cop Vijay Salaskar, who was gunned down during the 26/11 attack. But the two later parted ways, the reasons for which are not known.

Sharma shot to fame during his tenure as a senior inspector in the Crime Intelligence Unit, Andheri. Besides killing gangster Vinod Matkar, he eliminated several underworld kingpins including Parvez Siddiqui, Rafiq Dabbawala, Sadik Kalia and three LeT suspects. But his star began to fade when his name cropped up in some of the more high-profile cases including his alleged involvement in the custodial death of bomb blast accused Khwaja Yunus, his nexus with underworld and Dawood Ibrahim, a land-grabbing case in Malad and the alleged kidnapping and murder of Ramnarayan Gupta alias Lakhann bhaiya in a fake encounter. Source allege that he later shifted his loyalties to Chhota Shakeel. “He has had a chequered career spanning more than 2 decades,” said an official. —S Ahmed Ali | TNN

The Rise & Fall Of An Inspector
Inspector Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma, (47) joined the force in 1984 as a sub inspector at Mahim police station
Over the last 20-odd years, Sharma is believed to have killed 105 criminals After two years at the Mahim police station, he was transferred to the crime branch. In 1991, he was assigned to Juhu police station

In 1995 | Sharma was promoted to the post of assistant inspector and was assigned to the Anti Narcotic Cell of the crime branch unit in Bandra. In 1997, with Daya Nayak, he was accused of allegedly kidnapping and extorting scrap dealer Mohammed Nabi

Between 1998 and 2003 | Sharma who was heading the Crime Intelligence Unit at the crime branch made headlines after killing several gangsters including Rafik Dabbawala and Vinod Matkar

In 2004 | He took the charge of the Kandivli crime branch unit. He was also allegedly involved in settling land and property disputes with the help of underworld don Chhota Shakeel. His name cropped up in the custodial death of bomb blast accused Khawja Yunus

In 2006 | He came under the scanner for his alleged role in a land-grabbing case in Malad. It was in November 2006 that he allegedly orchestrated the killing of alleged chhota Rajan aide Ramnarayan Gupta in a fake encounter

In mid 2006 Sharma was transferred to Amravati. He returned to Mumbai in 2008 and was posted at Dharavi police station. Within three months then police commissioner Hasan Gafoor dismissed him

In September 2009 | Sharma went appealed to the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal against the dismissal order and shot back. The MAT passed an order to reinstate him with full wages. The Mumbai police’s appeal against the order is still pending in the HC

A LONG BATTLE: Ram Prasad Gupta, the victim’s brother

Huge support for Sharma in court

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Mumbai: Suryavanshi, currently senior inspector at MIDC police station, was not present at the court, being on sick leave. The SIT said that the vehicle used for bringing Gupta to Versova was yet to be recovered. Prasanna, who argued the case himself and said that Sharma’s associates had kidnapped Gupta, declared, “As of now we are concentrating on the kidnapping aspect of the case. Later we will focus on Sharma’s role in the murder.’’ All the arrested accused have been booked for kidnapping and murder. Magistrate Shaikh had conducted a probe and concluded that Gupta was in police custody when he was shot. The probe was carried out on the directions of the Bombay high court after Gupta’s brother, Ramprasad, filed a writ stating that his brother had been killed in a fake encounter.

On Friday, a huge crowd, including businessmen and serving and former police personnel like Sachin Vaze and Aslam Momin gathered in the court to extend moral support to Sharma. The defence counsel’s argument to transfer the remand hearing to another court as magistrate Shaikh had earlier conducted a probe was turned down. Senior advocate Shrikant Shivade who represented Sharma, argued that politicians and senior officers had conspired to “eliminate a courageous officer’’ by booking him in false cases.

Suryavanshi, the inspector who shot Gupta, had earlier deposed before Shaikh and claimed that he had only fired in retaliation when Gupta shot at him. However, the court found evidence to suggest that he was at the police station when the alleged incident took place. The magistrate also said that there was no examination of the weapons used by the police officers to verify these claims. Prasanna refused to comment on the action to be taken against Suryavanshi. “We are not in a hurry,’’ he said.

Ramprasad and Aruna Bheda, wife of Anil Bheda who was present with Gupta at Vashi, had sent telegrams and faxes to police commissioners of Navi Mumbai and Mumbai soon after the kidnapping occurred.

Anil Bheda was also picked up by the police and reportedly let off. His version of the story before Shaikh—that he proceeded to Thane from Vashi and went off to Shirdi—was not accepted. The husband-wife duo and a witnesses subsequently gave a statement before the magistrate revealing the true facts.

Damning Report
Ajudicial probe conducted by the magistrate R A Shaikh a year ago had already concluded that the encounter was a fake. “There is strong circumstantial evidence that suggests that Ramnarayan was abducted by the police and killed in custody,’’ said Shaikh in her report. The deceased’s brother Ram Prasad claimed that he had sent three telegrams to then police commissioner A N Roy’s office that his brother had been kidnapped by cops. Though Roy, in an affidavit, said the telegrams could not be traced, the telephone company BSNL confirmed their delivery.

“From the injuries Ramnarayan sustained, it can be made out that the police team’s intention was not to arrest, but was to kill him,” read the report.
—S Ahmed Ali | TNN

-----------------------------------

Three-year wait for JUSTICE

Nov 11, 2006 | Around 7.30 pm, the team of D N Nagar policemen led by inspector Pradeep Suryavanshi, inspector Dilip Palande and assistant inspector Arvind Sarvankar, claims to have gunned down alleged Chhota Rajan aide Ramnarayan Gupta alias Lakhann bhaiyya at Versova, Andheri The same day, around 3 pm, Gupta’s wife Subhalaxmi and his brother Ramprasad Gupta, who is an advocate, send a telegram to the police commissioner’s office alleging that some plainclothes policemen had kidnapped Gupta as well as his friend Arun Bheda.
Dec 2006 | Ramprasad moves the HC claiming that his brother was killed in a fake encounter Mar 2007 | The court directs a judicial probe
July 2007 | The Andheri metropolitan magistrate R A Shaikh starts the probe
Aug 2008 | Shaikh submits a confidential report in which she observes that there appears to be some substance in Ramprasad’s allegations that the encounter was nothing but a cold-blooded murder. She suggests that a murder case be registered against the police team. During this period, Suryavanshi threatens Shaikh and her family through some advocates. She files a complaint with the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and the HC alleging that Suryavanshi threatened her. HC directs the crime branch to conduct an inquiry
Nov 2008 | The crime branch submits a confidential report stating that a case should be registered against Suryavanshi
Aug 2009 | Court directs police to treat Ram Prasad’s complaint as an FIR and register a case
Oct 2009 | The HC appoints DCP K N Prasanna as the head of the Special Investigating Team. He is asked to conduct an investigation and file a report by January 11, 2010
Jan 7, 2010 | DCP Prasanna summons inspector Pradeep Sharma and his constable under the pretext of questioning them and arrests them. Arrest warrants have also been issued for other officers including Suryavanshi

----------------------------------------------------

An ENCOUNTER Too Many

Pradeep Sharma is not the only police officer who is infamous for gunning down criminals in encounters. With the exception of Daya Nayak who is currently under suspension, all belonged to the elite batch of 1983

Daya Nayak | The sub inspector, under suspension after coming under the scanner of the ACB, joined the force in 1996 where he worked with Sharma. During his stint with the Crime Intelligence Unit, he became known for high-profile encounters. Over the years, Nayak has allegedly logged 86 encounters

Sachin Vaze | The assistant inspector is believed to be one of Sharma’s most trusted lieutenants. In 2004, he was arrested by the state
CID in connection with the custodial death of bomb blast accused Khwaja Yunus. He was arrested on charges of murder and fabrication of evidence. He is out on an interim bail. Vaze’s resignation has not been accepted

Praful Bhosale | An intelligence officer, he was involved in several encounters but escaped major controversies till he was suspended from
service in the Khwaja Yunus case. He was in charge of the Ghatkopar crime branch unit in whose custody Yunus died. Though Bhosale is under suspension, he’s likely to be reinstated due to lack of evidence

Aslam Momin | He worked with Pradeep Sharma at the Andheri CIU and was one of the low-profile officers in the unit. He was
dismissed from service in 2005 for having underworld links. Momin has been accused of allegedly having links with the D Gang. In his appeal, pending in the high court, he has denied having links with the underworld

Ravindra Angre | He became a recognised face in 2003 after the gunning down of Thane’s notorious gangster, Suresh Manchekar.
Angre found himself embroiled in a controversy after builder Ganesh Wagh filed a complaint of extortion, kidnapping and robbery against him. After 13 months in jail, he was released, but is under suspension

Vijay Salaskar | The top cop was gunned down in the 26/11 attack. He was the unofficial ‘head of the death squad’. Salaskar rose to fame
after encounters with hardened criminals like Amar Naik, and two of Arun Gawli’s senior lieutenants including Sada Pawle. He was shunted out of the crime branch after he opened the underworld-gutka-baron nexus in 2005

The Times of India, January 9, 2010

Maha records highest deaths in cop custody

Mateen Hafeez & Kartikeya I TNN

Mumbai: Maharashtra has achieved the dubious distinction of having the largest number of detainees dying in police custody over the past three years.

They were all picked up on suspicion of being involved in a crime and died during interrogation at the local police station. With 69 deaths since 2006, the state has recorded two more deaths than Uttar Pradesh, widely considered to have the worst record in terms of custodial deaths.

Incidentally, the police in Maharashtra has escaped blame in most cases by terming the deaths in custody as suicide or an outcome of natural causes. However, legal experts who have worked both with policemen and criminals find it hard to believe that so many otherwise hale and hearty men have chosen to “end their lives’’ or “die suddenly’’ only when they are in custody. “Mostly, inhuman beating resulted in the deaths,’’ said former IPS officer and advocate Y P Singh.

In fact, allegations of torture follow almost every custodial death. Section 176 of the Criminal Procedure Code was amended in 2005 to provide for a mandatory judicial inquiry whenever a person dies in police custody. In Mumbai, every case of custodial death is followed by an inquiry conducted by the relevant crime branch unit and the local police station has to send a preliminary report to the National Human Rights Commission.

However, despite all these safeguards the number of custodial deaths in the state has refused to come down. Moreover, most of the officers, in whose custody the detainees had died, have also got a clean chit after an inquiry. This is clear from the fact that in the recent past, policemen were hauled up in only two cases—one was in which Ghatkopar blast accused Khwaja Yunus died in the custody of crime branch in 2002 and the other one in which an accountant, Premnath Rao, died at N M Joshi police station in April 2006.

A report, “Torture in India 2009’’, prepared by an NGO called the Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR), stated that 1,184 people were killed in police custody in India between April 1, 2001 and March 31, 2009. Even in that report, Maharashtra topped the chart with 192 deaths. The figures also revealed that most of the people died within the first 48 hours of being taken into custody.

The Times of India, December 27, 2009

Arthur Rd jail inmate ends life

Mateen Hafeez | TNN

Mumbai: A 37-year-old undertrial, arrested on charges of theft by the Meghwadi police, allegedly committed suicide by hanging himself in the highsecurity Arthur Road jail on Thursday night. The N M Joshi Marg police have registered a case of accidental death.

According to senior inspector Vasant Tajne, the deceased, Manoj Bansode, a resident of Goni Nagar in Jogeshwari (E), was found hanging from a window in the Arthur Road jail around 11.45 pm. “A jail constable, Arun Bhirade, who was posted there for patrol duty, first spotted Bansode’s body hanging by a window rod with a bed sheet inside the lock-up. Four other inmates were sleeping in the barrack and the body was removed from there. The jail doctor, who examined Bansode, declared him dead,’’ said Tajne. Bansode’s body was sent to JJ Hospital for a postmortem. No suicide note has been found.

Arthur Road jail is the place where Ajmal Amir Kasab, the only captured terrorist of the 26/11 terror attacks, has also been kept. The jail houses over a dozen hardcore gangsters from the Dawood Ibrahim and the Chhota Rajan gang.

The police said Bansode was arrested by the Meghwadi police on December 15. He was accused of snatching a gold chain belonging to a child at a wedding function. On December 16, he was sent to the judicial custody until December 30. Bansode, a plumber, is survived by his wife and two children.

“He was kept in another barrack in the jail since his arrival there. However, the jail authorities found that he was mentally disturbed and shifted him to barrack number 2 of the 4th circle on Thursday afternoon. The other four inmates, who shared the room with Bansode, were also under treatment. This cell is part of the jail hospital,’’ added Tajne.

Bansode had two cases of theft registered with the police in 2004. “His cell mates said they were sleeping and did not realise that he had committed suicide,’’ said an officer. However, Bansode’s family is not convinced. “The height of the window, from which Bansode was hanging, is just 6 ft while Bansode was 5.5 ft. A person trying to hang himself usually struggles for life at the last moment. How come nobody heard or saw him,’’ a family member said.

Police are now investigating if the undertrial had an argument or fight with any of the inmates. Other four inmates are facing cases like theft and pick pocketing.
mateen.hafeez@timesgroup.com

The Times of India, December 26, 2009

Little progress made in custody deaths’ probe

Murdered in Custody? Khwaja Yunus

Investigation In 15 Cases On, Cops Say Inquiries Fair

Mateen Hafeez I TNN

Mumbai:The Bombay high court asked the CBI to investigate the on September 11 custodial death of Mumbai youth Altaf Shaikh (22), but there has been little progress so far on 17 other recent custodial deaths. What’s more, official records acknowledge only two of those died due to police torture.

Most prominent was the Khwaja Yunus case, Initially, Mumbai police claimed Yunus had fled from police custody while being transported to Aurangabad for investigation.

Later, facts emerged about police involvement in his death and the state CID arrested nine policemen in 2004, including three officers, Praful Bhonsale, Hemant Desai and Sachin Vaze. The case is currently being tried in court.

In the only other custodial death acknowledged so far, sub-inspector Pramod Pawar of the N M Joshi Marg police station was arrested by the crime branch on April 19, 2007. He was charged with the death in custody of an accountant Premnath Rao.

Rao, employed with a private organisation was arrested on April 5, 2006, for allegedly stealing Rs 5 lakh. Pawar was the investigating officer and Rao’s body was found hanging in a bathroom outside the Agripada lock-up on April 6. Police then claimed it was suicide but the HC ordered a second post-mortem, which reportedly revealed injury marks and bruises on his body and neck.

Then there are 15 cases that were classified as suicides or natural deaths. The Mumbai police has been given a clean chit in the other deaths by the crime branch—which probed all the cases.

But legal experts, who have dealt with both suspected criminals and officials, point out that it is difficult to believe “why should so many people, most of them otherwise hale and hearty, suddenly die of natural factors or opt to kill themselves when in police custody?’’

However, police insist the probes into custodial deaths are conducted impartially. “We always try for a fair and clean investigation,’’ a police official said. But he, too, admitted that there would always be some suspicion as long as police probed deaths in police custody.

Custodial deaths can be of three types: suicidal, homicidal or natural. Whenever someone commits suicide in a police station, an inquiry is initiated by the relevant crime branch unit.

The local police station has to then send a preliminary report to the National Human Rights Commission.

Telling Tales Of Human Rights
A report, “Torture in India 2009’’, by the Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR), stated that 1,184 people were killed in police custody in India between April 1, 2001 and March 31, 2009, Maharashtra topping the chart with 192 deaths. The report stated that most died as a result of torture within the first 48 hours of being taken into custody.

The Times of India, October 21, 2009

Encounters in the LOCK-UP

Custodial Deaths, Like Encounters, Deny Suspects Fair Trial And Deserve The Severest Punishment, Say Legal Experts

Mateen Hafeez I TNN
Mumbai: There have been at least a couple of deaths in police custody every single year in the recent past. But, if the police probes into those deaths are to be believed, not a single person died because of police torture.

Mumbai Police has completed probes into 15 of the custodial deaths that occurred between 2001 and 2006; all these deaths have been blamed on suicide or natural factors. Probes into six more custodial deaths that occurred in the same period are now on.

The men in uniform may have given their own colleagues a clean chit in all these cases but legal experts, who have dealt with both suspected criminals and officials because of the nature of their work, say it is never so simple. Most deaths in police custody are the result of torture. “Why should so many people, most of them otherwise hale and hearty, suddenly die of natural factors — or opt for suicide — in police custody?’’ asked a senior criminal lawyer on Thursday. “Death in custody is perhaps the severest crime known to a civil society that claims to be governed by the rule of law. It, therefore, warrants the severest of sentences,’’ criminal lawyer Majeed Memon said.

Officials, however, insist the probes into custodial deaths are conducted impartially. “We always try for a fair investigation,’’ he said. But he, too, admitted that there would always be some suspicion as long as police themselves probed deaths in police custody.

But there have been instances, where the probe is not complete, of policemen being arrested or suspended after a custodial death.

Sub-inspector Pramod Pawar of the N M Joshi Marg police station was arrested by the crime branch on 19 April last year and charged with the custodial death of accountant Premnath Rao.
He was employed with a private organisation and was arrested on 5 April 2006 for allegedly stealing Rs 5 lakh. Pawar was the investigating officer and Rao’s body was found hanging in a bathroom outside the lock-up on 6 April. The family alleged thirddegree torture and the postmortem probe showed signs of internal bleeding and injuries. The police said it was a suicide but the Bombay High Court ordered a second post-mortem probe that showed injury marks and bruises on his body and neck. Three others — constable Salahuddin Sayyed and assistant sub-inspector Pandurgang Gaikwad of the Agripada police station and a local arms division constable posted at the lock-up) — were suspended for dereliction of duty and negligence.

CUSTODIAL SUICIDE
Cops, almost always, claim custodial deaths are just suicides

VINOD CHANDORKAR
Chandorkar was picked up by the Wadala police this February after his wife complained of torture. But, after he was found dead within one-and-a-half hours after his arrest, his wife alleged he had been tortured to death by cops. Officials did not say much besides stating that he committed suicide by hanging himself in the toilet.

SHIVKUMAR JAISWAL
The body of this 27-year-old alleged thief was found in a drum containing 300 litres of water inside the Mahim police station lock-up one December morning in 2005. But officials found it extremely difficult to explain how Jaiswal, more than five feet six inches tall, could drown in a water tank that was not more than three-and-a-half feet high.

Case that became a benchmark for cops

Mateen Hafeez I TNN
Mumbai: The Khwaja Yunus case, some say, has become a cautionary tale for policemen who believe in using strong-arm tactics for interrogation.

The alleged custodial death and the subsequent probe by the CID has brought as many as 37 men from the Mumbai police force under the scanner. Several of them have been arrested and released on bail ahead of the trial; they have all been stripped of their posts. Others have been transferred out of the elite crime branch for misuse of powers, and still others, apprehending judicial action, have acquired anticipatory bail.

Not a single accused in the Ghatkopar bomb blast case, in which Yunus was a suspect, was subjected to forensic tests. The police had merely relied on interrogations in custody, which yielded confessions that could in turn be presented in the POTA court. This along with circumstantial evidence became the basis of a case, which was eventually thrown out by the POTA court and questioned by the media.

For the 40,000-strong force, the case now serves as a benchmark, a constant reminder of the need to use “tactful interrogation techniques’’ and shun methods of third degree physical torture. Increasingly, the force has begun to rely on forensic tests and psychological methods to make a custodial accused sing. For instance, in probing the plot behind the 7/11 train bombings, four of the key accused have already been subjected to forensic scrutiny.

One of the investigators of the Zaveri Bazaar blasts conspiracy admitted that the Yunus saga has indeed led to increased reliance on forensic tests. “Earlier, police was dependent on circumstantial evidence and statements. Now we have facilities for brain-mapping, narco analysis, lie detection, etc. All those arrested for heinous crimes like acts of terrorism or rape are now subjected to such tests to get to the truth,’’ he said.

Techniques to coerce an accused into revealing details of a crime have also evolved through interaction with international law enforcement agencies. The methods used to break a suspect’s resolve can be subtle enough not to leave behind telltale signs of torture or cause serious injuries. “Sometimes they don’t let the accused sleep for days together, or they use battery-generated electric current to inflict shocks. There is no risk to life in these methods but they can slowly break a person,’’ said ex-IPS officer Y P Singh. Threats are also made that family members could be implicated if he does not fall in line.

The shift from brutal methods of interrogation has also been aided by civil society. An officer, who served on many highprofile operations, admitted “there is a lot of pressure from human rights commission, from superiors and media to stop using hard methods of interrogation. Who will investigate a case at the cost of his service, reputation and life?’’

UNSAFE CUSTODY

January 2006: Bombay high court asks the state government to submit a report on what it has done to implement the recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission on dealing with custodial deaths. This is in response to a PIL in which the petitioners argue that Maharashtra has recorded the highest number of custodial deaths in the country.

April 2006: High court orders a second postmortem to be conducted on the body of Premnath Rao, who died in custody at the Agripada police station. Then it orders a magisterial inquiry into the incident after Rao’s relatives plead that injuries on his body suggest that he could not have committed suicide in the lock-up, as the police had claimed.

December 1996: Laxman Somnath Verma dies at a jail in Kalyan. Later, the NHRC looks into the death and observes that Verma had died due to negligence. Verma had been suffering from tuberculosis and succumbed to the disease unattended since there was no doctor in the jail.

The Times of India, October 21, 2006

Probes into custody deaths acquit Mumbai police

By Mateen Hafeez I TNN
Mumbai: The crime branch has begun investigating the recent death of an accountant accused of theft in the Agripada police lock-up. The family of Premnath Rao is hoping the inquiry will throw more light on the circumstances leading to his alleged suicide. But going by similar inquiries conducted in the last five years, the findings are unlikely to contradict what the police have to say.

Inquiries into 15 custodial deaths since 2001 have attributed the cause to either “natural factors’’ or suicide. Not a single case was seen as the result of “torture in custody.’’ In four cases, the crime branch is yet to table its findings.

The statistics fly in the face of consensus among lawyers and activists who claim most custody deaths are a result of torture. Said criminal lawyer Majeed Memon: “Deaths in custody are mainly due to third degree torture. In the words of the supreme court, custodial death in a civil society is perhaps the worst crime.’’

However, DCP D D Kamalakar, who heads investigations at crime branch, insisted all probes were conducted in an impartial manner. “Investigations into four custodial death cases are currently on. In the last 15 cases, there was not a single death by torture.’’

Custodial deaths can be categorised into three types: suicidal, homicidal and natural. As a procedure, whenever an accused commits suicide in a police station, an inquiry is initiated. The local police station then has to send a preliminary report to the National Human Rights Commission.

It is alleged that often doctors in charge of government hospitals are hand-in-glove with police officers. “Medical reports are prepared as per policemen’s instructions and that is why it is difficult to establish the genuine cause of death,’’ said hospital sources. This despite the suspicious circumstances surrounding the death.

Rao (38) for instance, was found hanging in a bathroom outside the Agripada lock-up on April 6. The family termed it a result of ‘third degree torture’ and the first post-mortem showed signs of internal bleeding and injuries to his limbs. The high court then ordered a second postmortem which was conducted on Tuesday.

The body of a petty thief, Shivkumar Jaiswal alias Shakal (27), was found in a drum containing 300 litres of water within the Mahim police station premises on December 1, 2005. While the police termed it suicide, the dead man’s relatives claimed he was killed. “He was tortured to death. Is it possible for a mentally fit person to sit in a water drum to die?’’ Shakal’s mother asked TOI. A crucial forensic report in the case was still awaited.

Bomb blast accused Khwaja Yunus’s death is the other notorious example of alleged police brutality. Yunus’ friend Dr Mateen told a special court that Yunus died because of torture. But the police maintained Yunus had escaped from custody, although he was never traced. A state CID inquiry eventually concluded that Yunus was killed in custody. The CID arrested eight police officers and the trial is still on. The officers were, however, given bail.

The Times of India, April 13, 2006

Chargesheet against accused ready after 3 yrs

Khwaja Yunus

Khwaja Yunus Disappearance

By S Ahmed Ali & Mateen Hafeez/TNN

Mumbai: Three years after the mysterious disappearance of Ghatkopar blast accused Khwaja Yunus from police custody, the state crime investigation department (CID) is now putting the final touches on a 1,000-page chargesheet against five officers suspected of murder.

Explaining the delay in filing the chargesheet, state CID chief (IG) Y J Umaranikar said: “There were a few matters connected with the case pending before the HC. Secondly, we were busy piecing together the evidence.’’

The CID’s case is likely to rest on circumstantial evidence. The CID had refused to accept the theory put forward by the police that Khwaja escaped from custody while being escorted to Aurangabad for investigations. They have concluded that Khwaja died due to the use of third degree methods during interrogation at the Powai crime branch unit.

Earlier, the CID had secretly carried out a search for Khwaja’s remains on the basis of tip-offs. A team had visited Uran, Lonavla and some cemeteries in Mumbai. Officials said their field trials showed it was not possible for a handcuffed accused to escape from an overturned vehicle with seven policemen. “We don’t need the body any more as there is a supreme court ruling on custodial deaths and we have enough evidence to bring a conviction against all the accused,’’ said Umaranikar.

Khwaja, a software engineer working in UAE, was taken into custody while on a holiday in his hometown Parbhani. He was picked up on suspicion of links with a group which had allegedly set off a bomb on a bus at Ghatkopar on December 2, 2002.

He went missing soon after. Investigators claimed he had escaped while being escorted to Aurangabad, but his family insisted there was more to it and filed a habeas corpus plea. During the hearing, the court asked for the testimony of co-accused Dr Abdul Mateen, who told the judge that Khwaja was beaten to death.

The special court, taking note of his allegation, ordered the state CID to file a case of murder against the cops involved in the probe. Encounter specialists Praful Bhosale, Hemant Desai and Sachin Vaze were arrested and later released on bail pending trial.

For Asiya Begum, Yunus’s mother, it has been a long wait. “The arrested policemen have been released and there is no progress. We have been awaiting justice for three years,’’ she said.

She alleged that the prosecution was deliberately delaying the trial. However, she added, “We have faith in the court and will fight till we get justice. We will also go to the SC if the culprits are not punished by the special court.’’

Mihir Desai, an advocate handling the case, said they had filed a petition in the high court for compensation which has been admitted last November. “The trial in this case is expected to begin in the next two months,’’ he said.

The Times of India, January 12, 2006

Family was informed many hours later

Shivkumar Jaiswal alias Shakal

Cops To Carry Out Demo To See How Undertrial Drowned

By Mateen Hafeez/TNN

Mumbai: The family of Shivkumar Jaiswal alias Shakal (23), who died in the Mahim police lockup early on T h u r s d ay morning, alleged that the police did not inform them about the death for several hours, choosing to keep it a ‘secret’.

“Around noon a constable came to my house and escorted me to the Dadar police station. The police made me sit for over an hour and then I was sent back home. I didn’t know what was happening. They didn’t even inform me about my son’s death,’’ a mourning Hiravati, Shakal’s mother, said. According to the family, Rajkumar, the eldest son of the family, was finally informed about the incident at around 1.15 pm.

The body of Shakal, who was arrested in mid November on theft charges, was removed from a 3.5fttall water drum inside the police station. The post-mortem report said he died due to drowning. However, Shakal’s family refuses to buy the police’s suicide theory. “How can a person more than 5 ft tall die in a drum 3.5 ft high?’’ Shakal’s sister, Hausladevi, asked.

Shakal’s mother, who was widowed 12 years ago, stays in Heera Seth Chawl, near Worli Koliwada bus depot. Her son, who worked in a pizza shop near Grant Road, was caught stealing cash from his employers. It was his second offence. “We had arranged his engagement in June this year. I met him in the Bhoiwada court on Thursday and he promised he would never commit a crime again,’’ Hiravati told TOI.

Shakal was the fourth in a family of five siblings. His brothers, Rajkumar and Mahendar, work in a spice making plant in Vashi as daily wage earners.

Police said Shakal was arrested by the Gamdevi police after the robbery at his employer’s office. Later, he was sent to the custody of the Dadar police station on November 22 for a burglary at Dhanlaxmi Jewellers from where he had allegedly stolen ornaments worth Rs 3.44 lakh on September 9.

Hiravati, who last met her son on Wednesday, said Shakal was hopeful that he would be released on December 5. “He told me he would go to my home town in Uttar Pradesh along with his sister. But we didn’t know he would be killed in the lockup,’’ Hiravati said.

Senior officers probing the death in custody—the eighteenth in the last five years in umbai—are bemused. “It’s one of the most unusual cases I have ever come across in my life. So the probe has been handed over to the crime branch,’’ joint commissioner (law and order) Arup Patnaik said.

Patnaik said custodial deaths were usually accidental, suicides, natural deaths or due to torture. “It is still not clear how this man died. There is no question of suspending anyone until we come to know the exact reason for the death.’’

The police is likely to conduct a demonstration to verify if it was possible for Shakal to sit in the drum and drown himself. The doctors are also waiting for a report to see Shakal suffered epileptic seizures, which may have caused his drowning.

The Times of India, December 3, 2005

CID wants bail for cops in Yunus case cancelled

By Mateen Hafeez/TNN

Mumbai: The state CID, which is probing the Khwaja Yunus murder case, wants the bail granted by the Vikhroli metropolitan magistrate’s court to the four accused policemen cancelled.

It has approached the state government to sanction its application for the cancellation of policemen’s bail in the high court. The accused includes encounter specialist inspector Praful Bhosale.

Khwaja Yunus, an accused in the Ghatkopar bomb blasts of December 2002, mysteriously disappeared from police custody on January 7, 2003. While the police claimed he escaped from custody, his father moved the court alleging that his son had been tortured to death.

The special Prevention of Terrorism Act (Pota) court ordered the CID to treat the statement of Dr Abdul Mateen, another accused in the blast case, as the first information report and investigate the case accordingly.

In his statement, Dr Mateen had alleged that policemen beat up Yunus and he died because of cardiac rapture in police custody.

Suspended assistant inspector Sachin Vaze was first to be arrested in this case. A year later, four others, inspector Praful Bhosale, assistant inspectors Hemant Desai, Ashok Khot and sub-inspector Rajaram Vhanmane were also arrested by the state CID on March 5. The accused were later granted bail by the Vikhroli metropolitan magistrate court.

CID sources said the agency was not satisfied with the court’s decision to grant bail to the accused policemen.

“Murder is a heinous crime, only the sessions court or the high court has the power to grant bail. Therefore, we have moved to the law and judiciary department of the state government and submitted an application for revision of the bail application,’’ state CID superintendent S K Padvi told TOI.

According to Padvi, the state CID is waiting for the state government’s nod to approach the Bombay high court for cancellation of the accused policemen’s bail. “Once our application is sanctioned by the law and judiciary department, we will approach the high court,” he said.

When contacted, Satish Maneshinde, defence lawyer in Yunus case, said he was unaware about the CID’s move to approach the law and judiciary department.

The Times of India, May 15, 2005