Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court today stayed a previous direction passed by a two-judge bench to constitute a Special Investigation Team comprising officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities to investigate an assault case related to the 2023 Akola communal riots in Maharashtra.

The Court passed the stay order while issuing notice to the respondents on the review petition filed by the State of Maharashtra.

The matter came before a bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria after the two-judge bench delivered a split verdict in the review petition filed by the State of Maharashtra against the order for SIT probe with officers of both communities.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Maharashtra, requested the bench to stay the order.

Considering the same, the CJI passed the following order :

"Issue notice, returnable in 4 weeks time, in the meantime, there shall be a stay of paragraph 24 of the judgment under review."

The direction in paragraph 24 of the judgment was as follows :

"In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that this is a fit case to direct the Secretary, Home Ministry, Government of Maharashtra, to constitute a special investigation team, comprising senior police officers of both Hindu and Muslim communities, to undertake an investigation into all the allegations made by the appellant, by registering an FIR in connection with the assault upon him on 13.05.2023, and take appropriate action thereon as warranted. Further, the Secretary, Home Ministry, Government of Maharashtra, shall initiate appropriate disciplinary action against all erring police officials, in accordance with law and due procedure, for the patent dereliction of duties, as has been noted hereinbefore. Measures shall also be initiated to instruct and sensitize the rank and file in the police department as to what law requires of them in the discharge of their duties."

The SG added that the Court can dispose of the matter by choosing the SIT members itself. He relied upon the decision in Divine Retreat Centre v. State of Kerala, which held that neither the accused nor the complainant can choose which investigating agency will investigate.

He further pointed out that the main petitioners also never prayed for such a direction in their plea.

On September 11, the bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and SC Sharma passed the order, which, while criticising the Maharashtra police for failing to probe the assault, directed the constitution of a Special Investigation Team to investigate the allegations. The SIT was ordered to comprise senior officers from both the Hindu and Muslim communities.

On November 7, the said bench delivered a split verdict on the Maharashtra government's plea seeking review of the September 11 Order. While Justice Kumar dismissed the review petition, Justice Sharma issued notice on it.

Justice Kumar said that the order to include both communities was passed to ensure transparency and fairness in the investigation of a crime having a communal colour. The judge further emphasized that "secularism needs to be actuated in practice and reality, rather than be left on paper to be enshrined as a constitutional principle".

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 respondent Md Afzal (17-year old at the time).

As per the respondent, he witnessed 4 persons assaulting a person (Gaikwad) by a sword, iron pipe and other objects. When the respondent stopped at the site, he was also assaulted and his vehicle was burned by the assailants. The respondent 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 respondent'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 respondent was not in a position to speak. The murder incident was investigated and chargesheet filed against the accused at whose behest murder weapons were also recovered.

The respondent 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.

The Court directed that the SIT should probe the allegations raised by the respondent in relation to his assault.

Case Title: THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS Vs. MOHAMMAD AFZAL MOHAMMAD SHARIF, REVIEW PETITION (CRL.) No. 447/2025