Nithari Killings: Allahabad High Court slams CBI, UP Police for shoddy probe, implicating poor servant

The Allahabad High Court on Monday censured the investigating agencies including the Uttar Pradesh (UP) Police and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for a "casual and perfunctory" probe into the Nithari killings of 2005-2006 in Noida. [Surendra Koli & Anr v State & Ors]..The Court observed that by focusing on domestic servant Surendra Koli as the sole perpetrator in the Nithari killings, the investigating officials overshadowed the significant likelihood of organ trade being the true motive behind the infamous crimes.In the 308-page judgement, the division bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice SAH Rizvi said the failure to probe the possible involvement of organ trade was nothing short of "a betrayal of public trust" by the agencies."Loss of life of young children and ladies is a matter of serious concern particularly when their lives were brought to an end in a most inhuman manner but that, in itself, would not justify denial of fair trial to the accused nor would it justify their punishment even in the absence of evidence to implicate them."The Court made the observations while setting aside the conviction of Moninder Singh Pandher and his domestic help Surendra Koli in some of the cases concerning the Nithari killings. The duo had earlier been sentenced to death by a trial court.The Nithari murders took place between 2005 and 2006. In December 2006, skeletons were discovered in a drain near a house in Nithari village after Koli's arrest by the UP Police.A committee, formed by the Ministry of Women and Child Development in 2015, in its report had said that the CBI should have investigated all angles, including organ trade, in addition to sexual exploitation and other forms of crimes against women and children.The Court noted that despite such strong recommendations made by the High-Powered Committee, there was no record to show that an investigation was carried out along those lines.It agreed with the defence counsel's submission that the probe in the case was "absolutely slipshod" and care and caution required in such a sensitive matter was completely lacking. The Court concluded that the CBI "followed the easy course suggested" by the UP Police - which initially probed the cases, and ended up making a domestic servant "the villain of Nithari killings"..One of the major loopholes pointed out by the Court was that no disclosure statement, on the basis of which skulls were recovered in the case, was placed on record.It also observed that no independent witnesses were associated with the recording of the purported statement.The Court said the investigating officer of this case was a Deputy Superintendent of Police and was expected to be aware of the elementary procedures required to be followed for recording the disclosure statement."The only recorded text of the alleged disclosure made by accused SK [Koli] is contained in the recovery memo exhibited as Ka- 16," it found. However, the Court held that such documents cannot be called a disclosure statement as is required in law, because it was apparently drawn only after the recovery was made.Questioning the recovery made by the police in the case, the Court said it was "quite probable" that the police already knew about the existence of various skulls and body parts at the relevant places and arranged for the seizures to be conducted.The Court found it not safe to rely upon the prosecution evidence to hold the disclosure and the alleged consequential recovery as admissible against the accused. .It also observed that there was no explanation for the prosecution to have a continued police custody of 60 days of the accused - initially they remained in custody of the UP Police and then the CBI. The Court also found there was no medical examination done to rule out any torture of the accused during the police custody and accused retracted from the alleged confession at the first opportunity."Despite specific allegation of severe physical torture to the accused for extracting his confession the non-holding of his medical examination has rendered the confession unreliable," it added.The Court also said there was no evidence of last seen against the accused Koli and the motive on his part was not established. He had no criminal history and was working as a domestic help for nearly six years at Noida without any complaint, it noted..In this background, the Court opined that investigation was botched up and basic norms of collecting evidence were brazenly violated."It appears to us that the investigation opted for the easy course of implicating a poor servant of the house by demonizing him, without taking due care of probing more serious aspects of possible involvement of organized activity of organ trading," the Court said..Regarding the other convict Pandher, the Court noted that the evidence on record, at best, indicated that he lived a promiscuous life and indulged in physical relations with young girls or would get drunk and enjoy the company of young ladies.However, the same would not make him guilty of offences under Section 302 (murder) or 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code, the Court added.Apart from above, the Court found no other evidence on record to implicate him..Expressing its disappointment at the manner in which Nithari killings were investigated, the Court concluded that the procedure required to be followed for recording the accused’s disclosure had been given a complete go by. "The casual and perfunctory manner in which important aspects of arrest, recovery and confession have been dealt with are most disheartening, to say the least," the judges said..After evaluating the evidence presented in the case, the Court opined that fair trial had clearly eluded the accused and the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.Setting aside the conviction and death sentences, the Court ordered release of the accused..Advocates Yug Mohit Chaudhary, Payoshi Roy, Siddhartha Sharma,Mary Punch (Sheeba Jose) and Mohd. Kalim appeared for Koli.Advocates Manisha Bhandari, Omkar Srivastava, Syed Mohammad Nawaz, Dhruv Chandra, Shashwat Sidhant, Ayush Jain, Mohd. Abdullah Tehami and Shivam Pandey appeared for Pandher.Advocates Samit Mishra, Gyan Prakash, Jitendra Prasad Mishra and Sanjay Kumar Yadav appeared for respondents..[Read Judgment]