NEW DELHI: The Maharashtra government is caught in a legal tug-of-war after challenging a Supreme Court order to form a special police team (SIT) with officers from Hindu and Muslim communities to investigate the 2023 Akola communal riots. This order from September 11 raised eyebrows, making the police's faith a factor in probes, something Maharashtra opposes strongly. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, fighting for Maharashtra, argued before Justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma that forcing religion-based police probes would break the police’s secular backbone. “For every riot, police investigation must not depend on officers’ religion,” he insisted. The review petition promised the SIT would be set up but objected strongly to making religious makeup mandatory, calling it a threat to institutional secularism. Justice Sharma, taking a careful approach, said, “In the considered opinion of this court as review and recall has been sought of the judgment to the limited extent that 'it directs or mandates the composition of the SIT on the basis of religious identity' requires consideration and, therefore, let notice be issued to the respondents, returnable within two weeks.” It meant the court was open to hearing Maharashtra’s complaint. But Justice Sanjay Kumar was far less forgiving! Furious over Maharashtra's secret strategy of approaching each judge separately, he slammed the state for hiding facts. He outright rejected the review petition, explaining the need for both community officers in the SIT due to police slowness in registering cases during the riots. Justice Kumar said, “As the case related to communal riots..., and the hues of this case prima facie hinted at a religious bias, it was necessary to direct constitution of an investigation team comprising senior police officers of both communities so as to maintain transparency and fairness in the investigation. Needless to state, that should be the objective of the police machinery in the state of Maharashtra but, unfortunately, that did not happen in the case on hand.” He added, “In such circumstances, constitution of an investigation team comprising members of both communities involved in the riot would go a long way in ensuring and safeguarding the transparency and fairness of the investigation..." With the judges split, the big question now heads to the Chief Justice of India, who will decide which bench gets to untangle this fiery review petition. The Maharashtra government watches closely, as this ruling could set a powerful precedent on how police handle communal riot probes across India.