New Delhi, Nov. 8 -- The Supreme Court on Friday gave a split verdict on a review plea filed by the Maharashtra government challenging the top court's order to form a special investigation team (SIT) comprising both Hindu and Muslim police officers to probe the assault on a Muslim boy during the 2023 communal riots in Akola. The bench of justices Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma differed on whether their September 11 judgment needs to be revisited. While justice Kumar dismissed the review petition and rejected the applications seeking a hearing of the review petition in open court, justice Sharma said there were grounds for review and listed the case for an open-court hearing in two weeks. Considering the difference of opinion, the matter is likely to be placed before the chief justice of India (CJI) for constituting a separate bench to decide the matter. However, the order did not specify the next course of action. Justice Sharma said, "We are on the same page to the extent that we have agreed to disagree." In his separate opinion, he said, "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, [it] requires consideration." However, justice Kumar affirmed the earlier judgment and passed a scathing order describing how a complete dereliction of duty by the police in investigating the crime necessitated such a move. His separate opinion said that the case, related to communal riots involving the Hindu and Muslim communities, prima facie hinted at a religious bias. As a result, "it was necessary to direct [the] constitution of an investigation team comprising senior police officers of both communities so as to maintain transparency and fairness in the investigation," he added. Justice Kumar also noted how the Supreme Court has defined secularism in India, highlighting that the state neither supports any religion nor penalises the profession and practice of any faith. "This being the ideal, the state machinery must tailor its actions accordingly, but the inescapable fact remains that such state machinery ultimately comprises members of different religions and communities. Therefore, transparency and fairness in their actions must be manifest in matters even remotely touching upon secularism and religious oppression," he said. The state, in its review plea, had stated that the order to constitute the SIT, although well-intentioned, directly impinges upon the principle of institutional secularism. However, justice Kumar differed on this, saying, "Secularism needs to be actuated in practice and reality, rather than be left on paper to be enshrined as a constitutional principle." He added that an investigation team comprising members of the communities involved in the riot "would go a long way in ensuring and safeguarding the transparency and fairness of the investigation to be carried out..."...