Here is why CJI SA Bobde ordered a Judicial Inquiry into Hyderabad Encounter even after two parallel inquiry has already been initiated? Amaresh Patel LAW CRITIQUE Thu, Dec 12, 2019, at ,09:47 AM “We don’t want to assume facts. This is a question of credibility. Why are you resisting an inquiry? We expect you to be more statesmanlike in this. We are not saying you are guilty. We are not saying that you are wrong. At this stage, we don’t know anything.” Said CJI SA Bobde when Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who is representing the state of Telangana objected the inquiry, said, “That will be against the law. There can’t be two parallel inquiries.” After the series of events took place on 6th Dec’19, the four accused were identified from CCTV footage at the poll plaza and there was no dispute about the identity. Adv Mukul Rohatgi narrated the event the hon’ble court and said,“the accused were killed in retaliatory firing after two of the accused opened fire from pistols snatched from the police personnel.” Though the court was informed that two parallel inquiry were already placed to know truth of the event, one headed by Commissioner of Police and another was by National Human Right Commission itself, Rohatgi said, the third would be against the law. The three-judge bench headed by CJI SA Bobde, and Justice S Abdul Nazeer, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, expressed the concern and said, “We are of the considered view that there should be an inquiry. Let there be an impartial inquiry. There are aspects of your version that needs probing.” It was further said in response to Rohatgi on question that if the probe has already begun by two reputed agencies, why is there need of the third one?” CJI SA Bobde said, “We are not concerned with the investigation. The result of the investigation will have to be evaluated by a committee. And that the committee will evaluate and will submit a report. That’s all.” The bench has already said on Wednesday that it had proposed to order an inquiry by a retired judge of the apex court. He added that the judge, if and when appointed, will conduct the inquiry from Delhi and asked the parties to suggest names. CJI Bobde said the court had already checked with Justice (retired) P V Reddy, but it did not come through. The PIL in this matter alleged that the encounter was “fake” and that “was conducted only to divert the public reaction over sensational gang rape and murder cases against innocent young girls was filed by Advocate GS Mani and Pradeep Kumar Yadav.