The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday delivered split verdict on a plea for review of a judgment directing for setting up a special investigation team, comprising senior police officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities, to investigate into allegations made by a Muslim youth related to assault upon him and killing of an auto driver during riots in Akola on May 13, 2023.
Of the two-judge bench, Justice Sanjay Kumar dismissed the review petition filed by the Maharashtra government against September 11, 2025 judgment but Justice S C Sharma allowed it and agreed to examine it in open court.
The matter is likely to be posted before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate order.
In its plea, the state government contended the judgment would impinge upon the principle of institutional secularism and amounts to prejudging communal bias on the part of public servants.
"As the case related to communal riots, involving Hindu and Muslim communities, and the hues of this case prima facie hinted at a religious bias, it was necessary to direct constitution of an investigation team comprising senior police officers of both communities so as to maintain transparency and fairness in the investigation," Justice Kumar wrote in his order.
He pointed out the police machinery in Maharashtra, unfortunately, did not act objectively in the case on hand.
"Despite information being given as to the commission of a cognizable offence, neither the officers of the police station concerned nor the Superintendent of Police took necessary action by at least registering an FIR, clearly manifesting total dereliction of duty on their part, be it deliberate or due to sheer carelessness," Justice Kumar wrote.
The judge emphasised that the constitution of an investigation team comprising members of the communities involved in the communal riot would go a long way in ensuring and safeguarding the transparency and fairness of the investigation to be carried out and there is no impingement of any idealistic principle.
"Be it noted that secularism needs to be actuated in practice and reality, rather than be left on paper to be enshrined as a constitutional principle," he said.
On the contrary, Justice Sharma, however, said, as review and recall has been sought of the judgment to the limited extent that “it directs or mandates the composition of the SIT on the basis of religious identity,” it requires consideration.
"Therefore, let notice be issued to the respondents, returnable within two weeks," he ordered.