Badlapur sexual assault case accused killing: Kin claim wrong to say he fired at cop first
Thane (PTI): The family members of Badlapur sexual assault case accused Akshay Shinde have challenged the police claim that he fired at a policeman first following which cops fired in self-defence which led to his death.
Shinde's kin also claimed that police pressured him for a confession in the sexual assault case.
Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Monday night said a high-level probe has been ordered into the incidents leading to Shinde's death.
Shinde's body was taken from the Kalwa civic hospital in Thane to the state-run J J Hospital in neighbouring Mumbai for postmortem on Tuesday morning, a senior Thane police official said.
The autopsy was being conducted at the J J hospital, he added.
Shinde, 24, was accused of sexually assaulting two minor girls at a school in Badlapur town of Thane district.
A contractual sweeper at the school in Badlapur, Shinde was arrested on August 17, five days after he allegedly sexually abused the two girls in the school toilet.
He was killed near Mumbra Bypass in Thane on Monday evening when he allegedly snatched the gun of a policeman while he was being ferried in a police vehicle as part of a probe into a case registered against him on the complaint of his former wife, an official earlier said.
After he shot and injured an API, another officer from the police escort team fired at him, and he was declared dead by doctors at the Kalwa civic hospital, the official said.
However, his family members have challenged the theory that Shinde fired at the policeman first and later the cops retaliated.
"It is wrong to say that he first snatched the gun of a policeman and fired at him, and later the police fired at him in self-defence," Shinde's mother and uncle told reporters outside the Kalwa hospital on Monday night.
"The police got the confessional statement written by him under pressure to the effect that he has committed the crime. What they got written from him, he only knows," they claimed.
Akshay Shinde's father Anna Shinde said an inquiry should be conducted into his son's killing.
His mother and uncle alleged it was a conspiracy by police and management of the Badlapur school.
They claimed Akshay had told his kin that he was being beaten up police in custody and he also sent a chit seeking money.
His mother and uncle questioned the police version and asserted he could not have snatched the weapon of a policeman.
He was not depressed, they added.
"The police have killed our child. The school management must also be probed. The police got him to write something but we don't know what it is, only he knew it," the kin further alleged.
"My son was afraid of bursting crackers and crossing the road. How can he shoot at policemen?" Akshay's mother asked.
His family members also said he should have been taken to the court for trial in the case against him, and how did the police shoot him dead.
"The charges (in cases against Akshay) are not proved," they said.
Akshay's mother said he used to ask her when he will be released.
Some videos showing the body being taken for the autopsy on Tuesday surfaced on social media.
Akshay's parents were also seen waiting outside the locked gates of the well-guarded Kalwa civic hospital to have a glimpse of their dead son, but in vain.
No one was allowed near the room where the body was kept in the Kalwa hospital after doctors pronounced Shinde dead.
The area around the hospital turned into a fortress with a large number of police personnel deployed there.
Meanwhile, NCP (SP) Kalwa-Mumbra MLA Jitendra Awhad also challenged the police version and termed it as "baseless".
"How can a handcuffed accused snatch the revolver of a policeman and fire at him, when five more policemen are around," Awhad told a TV channel.
He claimed the ruling party will take full credit for the entire incident in the upcoming state assembly elections.
"It is for sure that they have planned and killed him," Awhad further claimed.
He said everyone knows who the school belongs to where the sexual abuse incident had taken place. "Who is that Apte?" he questioned.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC to hear pleas against laws granting immunity to husbands in marital rape cases
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court has said it listed for Tuesday pleas on the vexed legal question of whether a husband should enjoy immunity from prosecution for the offence of rape if he forces his wife, who is not a minor, to have sex.
A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala said the pleas were already "listed tomorrow" and they would be taken up after some part-heard cases.
The pleas for early listing were mentioned by senior advocate Karuna Nundy, appearing for a litigant in the case.
On September 18, senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for one of the litigants, mentioned that the pleas needed to be heard urgently.
The top court on July 16 agreed to list for hearing the pleas on the legal question. The Chief Justice had indicated that the cases might be taken up on July 18.
Under the exception clause of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), now repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, the wife not being minor, is not rape.
Even under the new law, Exception 2 to Section 63 (rape) says that "sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under eighteen years of age, is not rape".
The top court on January 16, 2023, sought the Centre's response on a clutch of petitions assailing the IPC provision, which provides protection to a husband against prosecution for forcible sexual intercourse if the wife is an adult.
On May 17, it also issued a notice to the Centre on a similar plea challenging the BNS provision on the issue.
The BNS, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam came into effect from July 1, replacing the IPC, Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the Evidence Act, respectively.
"We have to resolve the matters concerning marital rape," the bench had said.
The Centre earlier said the issue had legal as well as social implications, and the government would like to file its response to the petitions.
One of the pleas is related to a Delhi High Court split verdict of May 11, 2022, on the issue.
The appeal has been filed by a woman, who was one of the petitioners before the high court.
While delivering a split judgment, Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice C Hari Shankar concurred on granting the petitioners a certificate of leave to appeal in the Supreme Court as the matter involved substantial questions of law, which required a decision by the top court.
While Justice Shankar, who headed the division bench, favoured striking down the marital rape exception for being "unconstitutional" and said it would be "tragic if a married woman's call for justice is not heard even after 162 years" since the enactment of the IPC, he said the exception under the rape law was not "unconstitutional and was based on an intelligible differentia".
The concept of intelligible differentia distinguishes people or things grouped together from those that are left out.
Another plea has been filed by a man against a Karnataka High Court verdict that paved the way for his prosecution for allegedly raping his wife.
Karnataka High Court had on March 23 last year said exempting a husband from allegations of rape and unnatural sex with his wife ran against Article 14 (equality before law) of the Constitution.
The set of pleas are PILs filed against the IPC provision and have challenged the constitutionality of the marital rape exception under Section 375 (rape) of the IPC on grounds that it discriminates against married women who are sexually assaulted by their husbands.
