SC orders SIT probe into death of tribal man, grants interim protection to MP political activist from arrest

New Delhi, Dec 11 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Madhya Pradesh DGP to set up a three-member SIT to investigate the death of a 27-year-old tribal man and granted interim protection from arrest to a political activist in connection with a criminal case registered in the matter.

On October 30, the high court's Jabalpur bench had dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of political activist Govind Singh Rajput, observing that prima facie material existed against him and that the statutory bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 applied to the case.

On Thursday, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi directed the Madhya Pradesh Director General of Police to form a three-member SIT to probe Nilesh Adivasi's death.

Adivasi had earlier filed a case under the SC-ST Act against Rajput, only to later claim that he was forced to file this complaint. Shortly after he resiled from his complaint, he died by suicide and a fresh SC/ST case was registered against Rajput in connection with his death.

The CJI-led bench directed that the SIT be set up within two days and would comprise two SSP-level police officers of state cadre, who are not the natives of Madhya Pradesh, to ensure neutrality amid the conflicting accounts of the incident.

The third officer to the SIT has to be a woman Deputy SP, the bench said, adding that the SIT should probe the case expeditiously and preferably conclude within a month.

The CJI said the SIT must begin work immediately and examine every angle behind the death, including those that may not have been part of the ongoing police investigation.

"In light of different versions which have emerged, we direct that the arrest of Govind Singh Rajput, shall be stayed as an interim measure. If the SIT finds incriminating material, the SIT can seek leave of this Court for custodial interrogation. The SIT shall also consider other possibilities that might have led to the unfortunate demise of the victim," the bench ordered.

It said a fresh investigation was "warranted" by the officers without local ties.

The bench also directed that witness-protection measures be implemented and that no one, particularly tribal witnesses, be subjected to pressure.

In addition to protecting Rajput from arrest, the court extended interim protection to the brother of the deceased during the investigation.

"No coercive measure shall be taken against the brother of the deceased so as to enable them to join the investigation," the bench said.

Meanwhile, the bench asked the high court to take up the pending writ petition filed by Adivasi's wife, in which she had sought intervention alleging inaction and bias by the local police.

It said the high court should decide her petition in light of the directions issued by the top court.

The order was passed on the plea of Rajput against the high court's refusal to grant him pre-arrest bail in connection with Adivasi's alleged suicide.

Adivasi had first filed a complaint on July 1, accusing Rajput of caste-based abuse.

But a few days later, Adivasi told the Superintendent of Police in a signed affidavit that his complaint was false and had been taken from him when he was intoxicated.

He also told a magistrate that he had no dispute with Rajput and that he had filed the earlier complaint under pressure from people allegedly connected to a local politician.

Adivasi died by hanging later that month. His body was found in his residence on July 25.

After a few days, his wife filed three complaints and named several people she said had harassed her husband before his death.

On September 4, more than a month after Adivasi’s death, the police registered a fresh case naming Rajput and invoking provisions related to abetment of suicide and offences under the SC/ST Act.

Rajput then moved the trial court which dismissed his plea.

Later, he approached the High Court challenging the order dated September 26, of the Special Judge (SC/ST (POA) Act), Sagar, which had denied him anticipatory bail in connection with the case registered at Police Station Malthone, District Sagar.

The high court rejected the plea leading to filing of a case in the top court. PTI SJK MNL ZMN