Bombay HC Raps Police Over Investigation And Bias In Parbhani Custodial Death Case
Mumbai: The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court has raised serious concerns about the fairness of the police investigation into the alleged custodial death of 24-year-old law student Somnath Vyankat Suryawanshi in Parbhani, Maharashtra. On April 29, the court restrained the police from proceeding further with the inquiry until the next hearing on May 8.
A bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh questioned whether the State can pursue the case with a “preconceived notion.” “Though the State Government may have the authority to order a CID inquiry into any offence or accidental death, whether it can proceed with a preconceived notion is a question,” the bench remarked.
Somnath died on December 15, 2024, while in judicial custody at a state-run hospital in Parbhani. A magisterial inquiry under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, reportedly held the police responsible for his death.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Somnath’s mother, Vijayabai Suryawanshi, seeking an independent, court-monitored probe. Her plea alleges that Somnath was brutally assaulted in custody after being picked up during a police crackdown following communal unrest in Parbhani on December 10.
Appearing for the petitioner, lawyers Prakash Ambedkar, Sandesh More, and Hitendra Gandhi argued that despite the magisterial report indicting the police, the State had not yet registered a First Information Report (FIR) or taken action. Ambedkar submitted that during the pendency of the petition, the investigating officer should be restrained from proceeding further.
Public Prosecutor A.B. Girase responded that a CID investigation had been initiated as per a government circular, and notices were being issued to persons with knowledge of the incident.
Ambedkar, however, pointed out that the language of the notices issued by Deputy Superintendent of Police D.B. Talpe was “objectionable.” “It appears the State Government is proceeding with a preconceived notion and seeking to protect the real culprits,” he alleged.
The bench observed that while the State has the authority to conduct a CID probe, such an inquiry must be free of bias. “At least that much precaution was expected from the concerned Dy. S.P. who was making the enquiry,” the court remarked, noting that the suggestive language in the notices cast doubt on the CID’s neutrality.
The court directed the Dy. SP, CID, Parbhani, not to finalize any part of the inquiry until further orders.
The unrest in Parbhani was triggered after a replica of the Constitution placed near Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’s statue was vandalised during a far-right protest.
According to the petition, over 50 young people—mostly from marginalised communities—were arrested following the incident, with at least 23 later filing complaints of custodial torture. Somnath, who had travelled to Parbhani to appear for his law exams, was among those arrested. The preliminary postmortem report cited “shock caused by multiple injuries” as the cause of death.
news