Even If There Are Innocent Lapses In Investigation, It Can’t Be Allowed To Continue: Bombay HC Transfers Shiv Sena Ex-Corporator’s Murder Case Investigation To CBI
The Bombay High Court has transferred the investigation to the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) in murder case of Ex-Corporator of Shiv Sena party, now known as ‘Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray (UBT) Gat’.
The Court was dealing with a criminal writ petition filed by the wife of the deceased Abhishek Ghosalkar seeking a direction to handover the probe to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or any other independent investigating agency/machinery, preferably CBI.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Shyam C. Chandak observed, “It is trite that, where it becomes necessary to provide credibility and instil confidence in investigation, that the investigation can be transferred to another agency. Unarguably, quality of investigation is an important aspect to detect the crime and book the perpetrator of the crime. If all angles of a case are not examined as in the present case, it would lead to travesty of justice. Therefore, even if there are innocent lapses in the investigation, it cannot be allowed to continue, as it would ultimately result in denial of a fair and impartial investigation, leading to miscarriage of justice, which cannot be permitted.”
Advocate Bhushan Mahadik appeared on behalf of the petitioner while Public Prosecutor (PP) H.S. Venegavkar appeared on behalf of the respondents.
Brief Facts -
In February this year, the petitioner’s husband was killed in a gruesome and brutal manner. It was alleged to be a cold-blooded murder of an Ex-Corporator of the area. The said killing was seen live on Facebook which was aired from Mauris Noronha’s office. Mauris Noronha who shot 7-8 bullets on the deceased during the live proceeding, subsequently shot himself with the same firearm weapon, with which he shot the deceased. Pursuantly, a case was registered against him alleging offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act and under Sections 37 (1) (a) r/w 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The investigation although registered initially with the M.H.B. Colony Police Station, Mumbai, was subsequently transferred to the Crime Branch, Unit XI, Mumbai.
During the course of investigation, the police arrested one Amrendrakumar Ashokkumar Mishra, the bodyguard of Mauris. After investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet in the said case against Amrendra, within sixty days, for the offence punishable under the Arms Act. The said Amrendra was enlarged on bail by the Trial Court. The grievance of the petitioner was that, the Crime Branch has not investigated the cold-blooded murder of her deceased husband properly, nor have they looked into all the angles, much less investigated any other angle i.e., which will throw light on the complicity or involvement of others, apart from Mauris, who shot himself, post shooting the deceased.
The High Court in view of the above facts noted, “In the case in hand, after considering the material collected during the investigation, we feel that some angles have not been investigated or looked into and hence deeper investigation needs to be done. The petitioner’s husband (deceased), an Ex-Corporator was shot at by Mauris. The same was captured live on facebook and viewed by several persons. It was a cold-blooded murder captured live, an incident which shook the conscience of one and all.”
The Court added that although the deceased belonged to a particular political party, the petitioner has not particularly alleged that some other political party was involved in the gruesome act.
“All that the petitioner seeks is an in-depth investigation to be carried out from all angles to rule out the involvement of another person, including the involvement of Mehul, Amrendra and others. We have gone through the investigation carried out and find that there are some loose ends/areas which have not been examined by the police. We, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, deem it appropriate to transfer the investigation to an independent agency like the CBI, so as to retain public confidence and to ensure, that justice is done, considering what is observed by us herein-above”, it said.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and handed over the investigation to CBI.
Cause Title- Tejasvee Abhishek Ghosalkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AS:35938-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Bhushan Mahadik, Neha Sule, Pallavi Pakale, and Nikita Pawar.
Respondents: PP H.S. Venegavkar and APP P.P. Shinde.
