An overview of the Supreme Court in New Delhi. | Photo credit: the Hindu
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 15, 2025) decided to examine a request presented by the uncle of a man from Kerala, whose body was found on a service road and created by officers of a Delhi police station, even when relatives desperate in the Nebour, who had presented a missing station, presented a missing station.
A bank headed by Judge Surya Kant issued a notice to the center on the request that urged the Apex court to establish guidelines to ensure that the effective steps, including the mandatory implementation of the digital and biometric identification of unidentified bodies, were in their place so that traumatized families could save such incidents in the future.
Chacko Karimbil, the petitioner-Tío, said his nephew Sanoj Thomas had disappeared after traveling to Delhi. A missing complaint was filed along with Aadhaar’s details and Thomas’s photography at Vasant Kunj police station. The detailed records of Thomas’ call had indicated a location within the jurisdictional limits of this police station until October 4 last year.
The petition, presented through the lawyer José Abraham, said that family friends consultations had finally led to the IGI airport police station. There, the officers said that “a body similar to the Decio was created by the police officers of the IGI airport police on October 17, 2024 as an unknown body.”
Police officers at the IGI airport police station saw the body of the deceased that lay on a service road near the airport. Subsequently, the man was tasks of a hospital where he was declared dead. The petition said that police officers said they had done everything possible to identify the body. When with failure, they had increased him on October 17, 2024.
There is no shared information
The petition stressed that Vasant Kunj and IGI thought were at a short distance from each other, no information from the missing complaint or vice versa was shared, about the discovery of an unidentified body.
“At this time when Biometrics based in AADHAar are only used to observe a new SIM card, police officers failed Miserly by not using biometric identification methods even though all these details have bone bone,” the petition.
The petition indicated that very few states, in fact only eight, use the Zonal Integrated Police Network (Zipnet) to deal with cases involving missing and unidentified organisms. Kerala was among the states that did not use Zipnet. This had further reduced the scope of identifying the body.
By pointing out that Thomas has left a young family behind, the petition sought action against police officers and compensation. He claimed that the lack of adequate investigation into the circumstances of his death, the lack of evidence, including the images of CCTV and the fact that Thomas was denied an adequate burial according to his faith, violates his fundamental rights and those loved ones.
“Despite presenting a missing complaint, the negligent act of police officers led to the cremation of the deceased without due intimation to family members. Wandering police officers had completely violated the fundamental principles of the Constitution,” the petition said.
The Court listed the case for May 23.
Published – April 15, 2025 09:59 PM IST