Session Judge, Imphal West Aribam Guneshwar Sharma on Wednesday rejected the bail application of SI Thokchom Jitendro yet again. Jitendro is in judicial custody in connection with the death of goldsmith Arambam Nanao on May 2.
The court had on June 30, 2022 rejected the bail plea of the accused, SI Jitendro.
Late Arambam Nanao was arrested without a proper FIR and he allegedly died while in the custody of SI Jitendro; the late victim has signs of physical assault/torture, the court said.
The plea that the deceased died from consuming a suspected substance (acid) is not clearly established from the post mortem report, as toxicology report from CFSL, Kolkata indicated absence of toxics, the court said.
Hence, the cause of death due to 'Histotoxic Anoxia' is to be examined during the trial and it will not be proper to conclude during the hearing of bail application in view of the not so clear post mortem report, observed the court, adding that it finds that the investigation is not carried out to find out all possible angles and to unearth all possible suspects.
ALSO READ: Court orders judicial inquiry into custodial death in Imphal West
The court opined that there is sufficient prima facie evidence and it does not find enough reason to allow the bail application.
According to the police report submitted before the court, it is mentioned that some witnesses have stated that the alleged accused person interrogated the deceased, Nanao, and beat him severely with a cane stick.
It is also mentioned that the witnesses have heard that the alleged accused person demanded Rs 5 lakh from the deceased, Nanao. It is also mentioned that the accused person prepared a fabricated report alleged to have been filed by Kangabam Jacky and the alleged report was also not signed by Kangabam Jacky himself and nothing was also found in the General Diary regarding the alleged report.
ALSO READ: Arambam Nanao Death Case: Accused remanded in 15-day judicial custody
The court opined that picking up a person and confining without authority, thereby torturing severely clearly amounts to kidnapping, wrongful confinement and custodial death.
The IO of the case also submitted that the final Post Mortem report was collected from the department of Forensic Medicine RIMS and the concerned doctor opined that "No toxics could be detected on toxicological analysis. However, based on the histopathological and post mortem examination findings, the death was due to Histotoxic Anoxia.
During the course of hearing, the counsel appeared on behalf of parties to submit brief medical authority about Histotoxic Anoxia'. However, such authority is not submitted.
During the bail hearing, Public Prosecutor (PP) submitted that from the materials on record as disclosed by police report, it is clear that the death was due to misuse of police power and investigation is in progress and PP prayed for rejecting the bail.
Meanwhile, the Counsel for the accused submitted that the investigation is biased against the alleged accused and that other co-accused persons have not been arrested by the police. The alleged accused has been in custody for more than 90 days and if the Manipur Amendment in Section 167 CrPC is not there, the accused could have been released on default bail.
As the final post mortem report gives ‘histotoxic anoxia' as the cause of death, it is submitted that the cause of death is not consistent to the theory of custodial torture. Now the investigation is almost complete and there is no chance of the alleged accused interfering in the investigation, the counsel stated.
