A writ petition has been filed before the Supreme Court of India seeking urgent intervention to prevent the disposal of a deceased body by state authorities in an alleged fake encounter that occurred in Chhattisgarh. The matter was brought to the Court’s attention today before a bench comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, and Justice N Kotiswar Singh.

 

The petitioner, represented by Advocate-on-Record Satya Mitra, approached the Court with serious concerns that the respondents may proceed to dispose of the body before the matter could be heard. Initially, the petitioner had approached the Chhattisgarh High Court, requesting urgent consideration of the matter. However, the High Court did not list the matter for immediate hearing, creating apprehension that the state authorities might remove the body prematurely.

 

The petition impleads multiple respondents, including the State of Chhattisgarh, its Director General of Police, Inspector General of Police, the District Collector, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and the Late Baliram Kashyap Memorial. The petitioner has urged the Court to restrain the respondents from any action that could interfere with the preservation of evidence and impede investigation into the alleged encounter.

 

During the proceedings, when the counsel highlighted the risk of the body being disposed of, Justice Surya Kant responded lightly, indicating awareness of the sensitivities involved, stating:

 

 

The bench’s remark underscored the seriousness with which the Court treats allegations of human rights violations while maintaining judicial restraint in ongoing investigations.

 

The petition cites the Supreme Court’s landmark 2014 judgment in PUCL v. State of Maharashtra, where a two-judge bench comprising ex-CJI R.M. Lodha and Justice R.F. Nariman issued 16 guidelines for the investigation of alleged fake encounters. The Court had held that:

• Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life with dignity, which is the most fundamental human right.

• Any violation of this right, including extrajudicial killings or fake encounters, is treated with utmost seriousness.

• Illegal killings in police encounters undermine the rule of law and compromise public confidence in the administration of criminal justice.

 

The 2014 guidelines emphasized the need for transparent, prompt, and impartial investigations, with involvement of independent agencies or commissions when required, to ensure accountability of law enforcement officials.

 

Recently, the Supreme Court has also directed the Assam Human Rights Commission (Assam HRC) to undertake an independent and expedited inquiry into allegations of fake encounters in Assam. The Court observed that each of the 171 cases highlighted by the petitioner demanded objective scrutiny, reaffirming the judiciary’s commitment to protecting life and upholding human rights.

 

The present petition raises several urgent concerns:

1. Preservation of evidence: Preventing disposal of the deceased body is critical for forensic and investigative purposes.

2. Compliance with human rights standards: Alleged fake encounters violate fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21.

3. Accountability of state authorities: The petition calls for independent oversight to ensure the investigation is impartial and effective.

4. Judicial intervention in urgent situations: The case highlights the Supreme Court’s role in providing immediate relief in matters implicating life, liberty, and dignity.

 

The Supreme Court has issued notice on the petition, signaling that the matter will be heard expeditiously. The Court is expected to evaluate whether immediate protective measures are required to safeguard the body and facilitate a fair investigation. Given the serious nature of allegations involving alleged extrajudicial killings, the petition is likely to attract careful judicial scrutiny.

 

The case is officially listed as: