'You Can't Plead Helplessness' : Supreme Court Pulls Up CBI For Not Arresting Two Cops In MP Custodial Death Case

The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up the Central Bureau of Investigation for its failure to arrest two police officers allegedly responsible for the custodial death of 26-year-old Deva Pardhi in Madhya Pradesh.

A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan was hearing a contempt petition filed by Pardhi's mother alleging breach of its May 15, 2025 order to arrest the police officers responsible for the incident within one month.

“This can't go on like this. Despite a Supreme Court order you are unable to act. Then what is the use? You are pleading helplessness! 'He is absconding, proclamation is there, we can't trace.' Please don't plead helplessness. We will only say your helplessness feels in the garb of protection”, Justice Nagarathna said.

The Court also warned the CBI that it would hold the agency accountable if anything untoward happened to Pardhi's uncle, the sole eyewitness to the incident, who is currently in judicial custody.

“We will not spare you if anything untoward happens to Gangaram Pardhi and there is a second custodial event. Please inform the prison officials supervising his judicial custody. There cannot be a second custodial death otherwise we will take it seriously. Please convey it”, Justice Nagarathna said.

Throughout the hearing, the bench pressed the CBI on why the two officers had not been arrested. “Absconding means protecting. That is the meaning you want to say,” Justice Nagarathna remarked. She also pointed out that the CBI “swoops down and arrests within seconds or minutes” in other cases but was unable to arrest “its own people.”

The case concerns Deva Pardhi's death after his arrest in a theft case along with his uncle, Gangaram Pardhi, who remains in custody. Deva Pardhi's mother has alleged that her son was tortured and killed by the police. The MP police claimed he died of a heart attack.

On May 15, 2025, the Supreme Court transferred the investigation from the Madhya Pradesh police to the CBI after finding that the local police were attempting to cover up and influence the investigation into Pardhi's death.

The Court directed that the officers responsible for Pardhi's death be arrested within one month and that the CBI complete the investigation within 90 days of the arrests. It had also noted the threat to Gangaram Pardhi, the sole eyewitness, and directed the State to provide his protection.

During today's hearing, the bench repeatedly questioned the CBI's inability to arrest the two officers, Sanjit Singh Mawai and Uttam Singh Kushwaha, who have been absconding since April 2025 as per CBI.

The CBI told the Court that a charge sheet has been filed on September 15, and three officers have been arrested, but the two officers remained absconding.

The counsel appearing for CBI said that non-bailable warrants have been issued against the absconding officers, they have been declared proclaimed offenders and applications have been filed for attachment of their property. He added that raids and digital surveillance had been conducted, but the officers remained at large.

However, the bench was not convinced that the CBI could not trace the two officers, with Justice Nagarathna remarking, “You know where they are. You are protecting.” Justice Mahadevan described the situation as “very unfortunate.”

The CBI counsel objected to this, contenting out that the two officers had been absconding long before CBI took over the case.

The counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that Gangaram Pardhi, the sole eyewitness, has faced harassment and assaults in custody. She said that once the FIR was registered for Deva Pardhi's custodial death, police filed multiple cases against Gangaram to keep him in custody and intimidate him.

She stated that one of the officers responsible for the custodial death has filed an anticipatory bail application in Gwalior, but still had not been arrested. She told the court that CBI pressured the petitioner to withdraw the contempt petition. Further, Gangaram Pardhi had been beaten after the accused police officer's anticipatory bail application was rejected, she said.

“The prison officials are hand in gloves with the police officer. After the ABA was rejected again he has been beaten up and he is in the hospital. They are so scared of even informing this to the court as there may be repercussions”, she said.

Remaining unconvinced of the CBI's explanation for not having arrested the two officers, Justice Nagarathna said that the court will frame contempt charges against the Chief Secretary and CBI Director, and the Additional Superintendent responsible for the investigation.

However, ultimately, the Court directed the CBI to file a status report detailing the steps taken to trace and arrest the two officers. The officers responsible for the investigation have to file affidavits by Thursday, and the matter has been listed for further hearing on September 25.

Justice Nagarathna added that if the arrests were made within the next two days, the contempt proceedings might be dropped.

Regarding the safety of the eyewitness, the Court suggested the petitioner's counsel to approach the High Court for protection, but warned CBI that it will take a serious view if something happens to him. “You also inform the jail authorities that nothing should happen to the eye witness, not even a scar”, Justice R Mahadevan said to the CBI counsel.

Case No. – Conmt. Pet.(C) No. 594/2025 

Case Title – Hansura Bai v. Hanuman Prasad Meena