Institute of Legal and Management Studies

Criticizing the Maharashtra police for failing to probe an assault during the 2023 Akola Riots, the Supreme Court today directed constitution of a Special Investigation Team to investigate the allegations, which shall comprise senior officers from both the Hindu and Muslim communities.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma delivered the verdict on the plea of a person claiming to be an eye-witness to a murder during the Akola Riots, which had a communal tenor. This person alleged that instead of the real culprit, FIR was registered against certain Muslim persons and the investigation was biased. He sought action against the erring officials and a proper investigation.

Directing formation of an SIT, the Supreme Court underlined that once a person dons a police uniform, they must rise above all kinds of biases (based on religion, caste, etc.) and discharge their duty in accordance with law.

Notably, the petitioner (alleged eye-witness) claims to have been assaulted at the time of the Riots. He had approached the Bombay High Court seeking constitution of an SIT. But vide the impugned order, the High Court rejected his plea, noting that he had not approached the police authorities in reasonable period to relay his account. The High Court noted that the chargesheet had already been filed and the petition seemed to be arising out of an "ulterior motive". It also observed that the "proper aggrieved persons", that is, the legal representatives of the victim who died during the Riots had not approached any Court claiming that the prosecution was targeted at persons other than the real culprit.

Aggrieved by the High Court order, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court.

Background

A series of communal riots broke out in May, 2023 in Akola, Maharashtra apparently following an objectionable social media post regarding Prophet Muhammad. The incident resulted in the death of one Vilas Mahadevrao Gaikwad and injuries to the petitioner (17-year old at the time).

As per the petitioner, he witnessed 4 persons assaulting a person (Gaikwad) by a sword, iron pipe and other objects. When the petitioner stopped at the site, he was also assaulted and his vehicle burned by the assailants. The petitioner was admitted in a hospital and his statement recorded by the police, but no FIR was registered.

On the other hand, the Maharashtra police disputed the factum of petitioner's statement being recorded by it. It was claimed that information regarding his admission in the hospital was received, but when an officer went there, the petitioner was not in a position to speak. The murder incident was investigated and chargesheet filed against accused at whose behest murder weapons were also recovered.

Story to be updated.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Abhay Mahadeo Thipsay, Advocate Fauzia Shakil (for petitioner)

Case Title: MOHAMMAD AFZAL MOHAMMAD SHARIF Versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS., SLP(Crl) No. 8494/2025