The Bombay High Court at Goa has mandated the transfer of the investigation into the assault on advocate Ankur Kumar during a demolition in Morjim, citing significant lapses by local police.
New Delhi, India Jul 21, 2026 ALN: Panaji: Taking cognisance of the violent attack on advocate Ankur Kumar during a demolition process in Morjim, the High Court of Bombay at Goa on Monday directed the Superintendent of Police, North Goa, to immediately transfer the investigation to an experienced officer from a different police station.
The High Court stated that the new officer must not be below the rank of Police Inspector and that the Sub Divisional Police Officer (SDPO), Pernem, must not interfere in the investigation in any manner. This decision underscores the High Court's commitment to ensuring a fair and impartial investigation in light of the serious allegations surrounding the case.
The court expressed its shock over the “serious incident” of violence that occurred during a court-ordered demolition in Morjim last Friday. The court stripped the Pernem taluka police of their investigative powers in the case, citing a “serious lapse” in providing protection and “unexplained deficiencies” in the subsequent probe. Such measures reflect the judiciary's role in upholding the rule of law and safeguarding the rights of individuals, particularly in cases involving violence and potential abuse of power.
The matter came to the High Court’s attention through the Goa High Court Bar Association, following the July 17 assault on the advocate and a petitioner at Survey No 119/3 in Morjim. The victims were present to oversee the implementation of orders for the demolition of illegal structures identified by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA). This incident highlights ongoing tensions surrounding illegal constructions in coastal areas, which are often contentious due to environmental concerns and local governance issues.
The High Court noted, “Especially from the noting and the records, the court is aghast that the communication has been kept pending in the office of Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Pernem from July 13, 2026, till July 17, 2026, at about 4.45 pm till the alleged incident has already taken place.” The timeline of events is crucial in understanding the failures of the local police and administrative bodies, as it raises questions about accountability and the effectiveness of communication regarding public safety.
The records revealed that the Deputy Collector and Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) of Panaji had communicated the demolition order to the Superintendent of Police (SP), North Goa, as early as July 10. This order was forwarded to the SDPO in Pernem on July 13 with clear instructions to provide adequate police presence. However, the police inspector of the Mandrem police station claimed the order only reached him at 4.45 pm on July 17, long after the assault had taken place. This significant delay in communication raises concerns about systemic failures within the police department and the potential ramifications for public safety.
The court also pointed out that this was a “serious lapse on the part of the Office of SDPO, Pernem” and warned that “eventual action will be considered on all the officers who are responsible for this delay.” Such warnings from the judiciary are essential in reinforcing the need for accountability among law enforcement officials, particularly in cases where their inaction may lead to violence or harm to citizens.
Furthermore, the High Court questioned why the civil authorities present at the site, including the Mamlatdar of Pernem, the talathi of Morjim, and GCZMA officials, allowed the demolition to commence without ensuring that the directed police protection was in place. This inquiry into the actions of civil officials emphasizes the interconnected nature of administrative responsibilities in ensuring public safety during potentially volatile situations.
“The failure of more than one administrative channel to communicate or act upon the order cannot be treated as a mere matter of routine correspondence,” the High Court stated. It directed officials, including the Mamlatdar, to file individual affidavits, explaining their personal roles in communicating the orders and their eyewitness accounts of the violence. This requirement for individual accountability serves as a mechanism to ensure that all parties involved are held responsible for their actions or inactions.
The High Court has ordered the Member Secretary of GCZMA and the Deputy Collector of Pernem to ensure that the remaining demolitions proceed “without avoidable delay” and with “adequate police protection.” This directive is significant as it not only addresses the immediate need for safety during such operations but also reinforces the importance of following legal protocols to prevent further incidents of violence.
Additionally, the High Court raised questions about why the First Information Report (FIR) was not registered until 5.20 am the following day, despite the victims being taken to the police station immediately after the incident. The court said, “The FIR itself was recorded in the morning at 5.20 am remains a serious concern for us to determine the intentions of the investigating officer who was expected to act promptly in the matter.” This delay in registering the FIR is a critical aspect of the case, as it can significantly impact the investigation and the ability to gather timely evidence, which is essential for a fair judicial process.
This incident and the subsequent judicial scrutiny highlight broader issues concerning law enforcement's effectiveness in handling violent incidents, particularly those involving legal professionals and public officials. The High Court's intervention reflects a growing recognition of the need for reform in policing practices and the importance of safeguarding the legal rights of individuals in the face of violence and intimidation.
As the investigation progresses under the new officer, it will be crucial to monitor how the police handle the case and whether the necessary reforms are implemented to prevent such lapses in the future. The outcome of this case may also have implications for how similar situations are managed in Goa and could lead to a reevaluation of policies concerning demolition operations and the protection of individuals involved in legal proceedings.
In conclusion, the High Court's decisive action in transferring the investigation and demanding accountability from both police and civil officials underscores the judiciary's vital role in upholding justice and ensuring that the rule of law prevails, particularly in situations where there is a potential for abuse of power and violence against individuals seeking to uphold legal standards.
To learn more about the latest developments in Crime & Law, stay updated with our exclusive reports and analyses on AiLensNews.
