MUMBAI: Sub-inspector Munir Shaikh of the Malwani police station was arrested on Thursday by the crime branch for compelling a woman to commit suicide. He has been remanded in police custody till April 11.
This is Shaikh's second arrest in the case. In December 2010, the Malwani police had arrested him under sections 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint), 343 (wrongful confinement for three or more days) and 348 (wrongful confinement to extort confession or compel restoration of property) of the IPC. He was later released on bail of Rs 25,000. A few days later, the victim, Kunda Shinde, succumbed to her injuries, following which the police slapped section 306 (abetment of suicide) on Shaikh. Since then, the sub-inspector had been absconding. The case was later handed over to the crime branch.
According to the police, Shaikh had approached the sessions court for anticipatory bail. After it was rejected, he filed a plea in the high court, which, too, did not grant him relief, but told him that he could approach the Supreme Court within 10 days. "On Thursday, he informed the crime branch through an advocate that he wanted to surrender. As soon as he did that, the court sent him to police custody," said a police officer.
The case originated on December 14, 2010, when Rupali Sawant approached the Malwani police station, alleging that Kunda had stolen gold ornaments worth Rs 3 lakh from her house. Shaikh, who was given charge of the matter, called Shinde and her daughter Sonali to the police station and detained them for more than 24 hours.
A police officer said Shaikh should have registered an FIR and should have produced the Shindes before a court. But Shaikh released them only on December 16. But on December 21, he detained her again, along with her husband Chindu. This provoked her into hanging herself with a nylon rope inside her cell.
However, an alert constable freed her from the noose in the nick of time. She was admitted to hospital, where she died on December 31.
"Shaikh detained Shinde and her daughter without registering the arrests or making an entry in the police diary," an officer said. "If he was not confident about the two being behind the theft, he should have let them go after questioning."
This is Shaikh's second arrest in the case. In December 2010, the Malwani police had arrested him under sections 341 (punishment for wrongful restraint), 343 (wrongful confinement for three or more days) and 348 (wrongful confinement to extort confession or compel restoration of property) of the IPC. He was later released on bail of Rs 25,000. A few days later, the victim, Kunda Shinde, succumbed to her injuries, following which the police slapped section 306 (abetment of suicide) on Shaikh. Since then, the sub-inspector had been absconding. The case was later handed over to the crime branch.
According to the police, Shaikh had approached the sessions court for anticipatory bail. After it was rejected, he filed a plea in the high court, which, too, did not grant him relief, but told him that he could approach the Supreme Court within 10 days. "On Thursday, he informed the crime branch through an advocate that he wanted to surrender. As soon as he did that, the court sent him to police custody," said a police officer.
The case originated on December 14, 2010, when Rupali Sawant approached the Malwani police station, alleging that Kunda had stolen gold ornaments worth Rs 3 lakh from her house. Shaikh, who was given charge of the matter, called Shinde and her daughter Sonali to the police station and detained them for more than 24 hours.
A police officer said Shaikh should have registered an FIR and should have produced the Shindes before a court. But Shaikh released them only on December 16. But on December 21, he detained her again, along with her husband Chindu. This provoked her into hanging herself with a nylon rope inside her cell.
However, an alert constable freed her from the noose in the nick of time. She was admitted to hospital, where she died on December 31.
"Shaikh detained Shinde and her daughter without registering the arrests or making an entry in the police diary," an officer said. "If he was not confident about the two being behind the theft, he should have let them go after questioning."
No comments:
Post a Comment