Maharashtra forensic labs backlogged since 2020, Bombay High Court seeks report
The state informed the court that forensic laboratories are currently examining samples dating back to 2020, leaving little capacity for newer cases. Prosecutors said the delay in the present case, registered in 2024, was due to this backlog.
The Bombay High Court has sought a detailed report from Maharashtra's Additional Chief Secretary (Home) on the state's forensic laboratory infrastructure, workload, and delays, amid concerns over mounting backlogs since 2020.
A bench led by Justice Shivkumar Dige directed that the report be submitted by April 28. It has asked the state to specify the availability of forensic labs, the volume of cases handled by each facility, and the average time taken to process reports. The court has also sought clarity on whether the government plans to establish additional forensic laboratories to address the growing pendency of criminal cases.
The directions came during the hearing of a bail plea filed by a murder accused, whose counsel argued that he has been in custody for over two years without the forensic report being filed. Advocate Satyavrat Joshi, appearing for the accused, pointed out that despite earlier court directions, the forensic analysis of CCTV footage -- a key piece of evidence -- is still pending.
Representing the state, Additional Public Prosecutor MG Patil informed the court that the investigating officer had followed up with the forensic laboratory, only to be told that samples from 2020 are currently under examination. Since the case in question dates to 2024, the report is likely to take more time.
The case stemmed from a violent incident reported at Vadgaon Maval Police Station in Pune, involving charges of rioting, unlawful assembly, and murder. According to the prosecution, what began as a minor altercation near a farm in Kusur village escalated into a fatal assault.
The accused, Mohan Shankar Turde, is alleged to have been part of the unlawful assembly and to have actively participated in the attack. The charge sheet and witness statements claim that he, along with co-accused, used wooden logs, iron rods, and an axe to repeatedly assault the victim, leading to his death at a farmhouse. Witnesses who tried to intervene were also allegedly attacked.
The prosecution has relied on eyewitness accounts, CCTV footage, and call detail records to establish the accused's presence at the scene. The defence, however, has claimed alibi, making the forensic examination of the CCTV footage crucial to the case.