Mumbai, Mar 19 (PTI) A special NIA court here has refused to discharge Irfan Khan, the alleged main conspirator in the 2022 murder of Amravati-based pharmacist Umesh Kolhe, saying there is sufficient prima facie evidence against the accused to proceed with trial.
The court said the murder was not the result of personal rivalry but a “larger conspiracy” intended to strike terror among a section of the people of India.
Special NIA judge Chakor Bhaviskar, in an order passed last week, noted the accused was “not annoyed by the singular and stray act of the victim, but was holding a grudge against an entire community”.
Kolhe, who had shared social media posts backing suspended BJP leader Nupur Sharma over the latter’s objectionable comments about Prophet Mohammad, was killed in Amaravati, some 650 kilometres from here, in June 2022.
As many as 11 accused, including Khan, were arrested in the case under Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder as well as Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Khan’s defence was that invocation of UAPA was an “afterthought and completely misused”.
He claimed police, which probed earlier, took it as a murder case, but when “NIA (National Investigation Agency) took over the investigation, it cooked up and fabricated the facts afterthought”.
Khan contended that no terrorist organization was involved in any manner and, hence, it did not attract UAPA. He sought discharge from all offences, or at least UAPA charges.
However, the court, in view of the material on record, held the “case is not a murder simplicitor under section 302 of the IPC” as vehemently argued by defence.
None of the accused in the case have any personal rivalry with the victim, still they hatched a criminal conspiracy to murder him, the court noted.
“The intention of the accused in this case was to create terror in the minds of a particular section of people in India, and for that, using lethal weapons caused the death of Kolhe. They did create terror,” the court said.
It satisfied the ingredients of the definition of ‘terrorist act’ as required in section 15 of UAPA, the judge stated.
The court asserted there were provocative speeches which “revealed the accused vouched to create terror in particular sections of people”.
The court concluded there was “more than sufficient material” to frame charge against the accused for all the alleged offences.
Resultantly, the accused does not deserve discharge for any of the offences, including under UAPA, the NIA court ruled. PTI AVI BNM
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.