Home »  News »  India

Maval firing: HC asks steps taken by govt against guilty policemen indicted by MG Gaikwad committee

Monday, 7 July 2014 - 8:00am IST | Agency: dna

The Bombay High court has questioned the Maharashtra government on what action has taken against the police officers, who were found guilty by MG Gaikwad committee, which was probing the police firing incident at Maval, near Pune, in August 2011.

A division bench of justices Abhay Oka and AS Chandurkar asked the government to file its affidavit by July 30 stating the steps taken against the errant policemen, including then superintendent of police, Pune (Rural), Sandeep Karnik.

The committee has concluded that police firing was not necessary and police acted beyond their powers, violating provisions under the Criminal Procedure Code. On August 8, 2011, police fired on villagers who were opposing the government's decision of laying a closed pipeline to supply water from Pavna Dam to the limits of Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation. Agriculturists had claimed that the closed pipeline would cut off water supply for their crops. Three protestors were killed in the police firing.

The HC was hearing a public interest litigation filed by activist IG Khandelwal seeking registration of FIR against Karnik, who was leading the team at Maval. Karnik was the first to open fire. While scheduling the PIL fir hearing for August 4, the HC asked the government to provide a copy of the Gaikwad report to Khandelwal.

Khandelwal had sought a copy of the report which was tabled before the state legislature on June 14. Following a complaint by Khandelwal, FIR was registered against two police officers and six constables.

The police had even filed "C" Summary (There is no evidence against the accused leading to case closure) before the metropolitan magistrate at Maval, stating there was no evidence against the police officers named in the FIR to prosecute them. This was challenged by Khandelwal.

Karnik was later transferred to the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Thane.

Jump to comments

Recommended Content