AHMEDABAD: In the case of suicide by a trainee police sub-inspector at Karai Police Academy in December 2018, a city sessions court has rejected the accused DySP’s plea and has ordered immediate trial against him on charges of sodomy and abetment.
The court rejected an application by the police academy trainer and ordered to start the trial immediately, observing that it was a case where a police officer was trying to shield another cop.
After PSI Devendrasinh Rathod shot himself dead at the academy and left behind suicide note, DySP N P Patel was booked under Section 377 and 306 of the IPC for carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man and abetment to suicide.
An FIR was lodged with the Ahmedabad crime branch following a complaint by Rathod’s family. The crime branch filed a C-summary report requesting the court to close the case for want of evidence. A metropolitan court rejected the closure report in July, and DySP Patel challenged this order before a sessions court.
City sessions judge A J Kanani also rejected the application and ordered for immediate committal of his case so that evidence against him is preserved. The court pulled up the city crime branch’s investigator for his biased probe and tilting it in favour of the accused.
The court observed, “In a case like this, where a police officer is investigating another police officer with a view to shielding him, the question arises how can a common man get justice? This will lessen the credibility of the police.”
The court said that the suicide note is clear about the torture and sexual exploitation, but the investigating officer keeps contradicting every statement as if he is conducting a sessions trial. It lambasted the investigator for assuming the role of a sessions judge and declaring the accused cop as innocent. It observed that the investigator was trying to shield the accused cop and filed C-summary report as if the suicide note held no value at all.
The court also observed that instead of probing the cause for the suicide on the basis of the suicide note, the investigator had tilted the probe in favour of the accused, as if he is an honest and upright officer.
The investigation sought to establish that the deceased was not meeting the training parameters and that he was week and that he had misjudged the accused, the court observed.
The court rejected an application by the police academy trainer and ordered to start the trial immediately, observing that it was a case where a police officer was trying to shield another cop.
After PSI Devendrasinh Rathod shot himself dead at the academy and left behind suicide note, DySP N P Patel was booked under Section 377 and 306 of the IPC for carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man and abetment to suicide.
An FIR was lodged with the Ahmedabad crime branch following a complaint by Rathod’s family. The crime branch filed a C-summary report requesting the court to close the case for want of evidence. A metropolitan court rejected the closure report in July, and DySP Patel challenged this order before a sessions court.
City sessions judge A J Kanani also rejected the application and ordered for immediate committal of his case so that evidence against him is preserved. The court pulled up the city crime branch’s investigator for his biased probe and tilting it in favour of the accused.
The court observed, “In a case like this, where a police officer is investigating another police officer with a view to shielding him, the question arises how can a common man get justice? This will lessen the credibility of the police.”
The court said that the suicide note is clear about the torture and sexual exploitation, but the investigating officer keeps contradicting every statement as if he is conducting a sessions trial. It lambasted the investigator for assuming the role of a sessions judge and declaring the accused cop as innocent. It observed that the investigator was trying to shield the accused cop and filed C-summary report as if the suicide note held no value at all.
The court also observed that instead of probing the cause for the suicide on the basis of the suicide note, the investigator had tilted the probe in favour of the accused, as if he is an honest and upright officer.
The investigation sought to establish that the deceased was not meeting the training parameters and that he was week and that he had misjudged the accused, the court observed.