scorecardresearch
Saturday, November 2, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeJudiciary‘CBI, Pune Police failed to find masterminds’ — what court said in...

‘CBI, Pune Police failed to find masterminds’ — what court said in Dabholkar murder case judgment

Nearly 11 years after rationalist Narendra Dabholkar was shot dead, a Pune court sentenced 2 assailants to life imprisonment Friday; 3 others were acquitted due to lack of evidence.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

New Delhi: A trial court in Pune convicted two men for gunning down rationalist Dr Narendra Dabholkar in 2013, but said the investigation by Pune police and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) failed to identify who masterminded the murder. The court also acquitted three others accused in the murder.

Additional Sessions Judge Prabhakar P Jadhav noted that the murder was executed by the two convicts, but asserted that “the main mastermind behind the crime is someone else”.

“They (Pune police and CBI) have to introspect, whether it is their failure or deliberate inaction on their part due to influence by any person in power,” the court observed.

The court sentenced Sachin Prakashrao Andure and Sharad Bhausaheb Kalaskar to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5 lakh. They were convicted under Sections 302 (murder) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, along with charges under the Indian Arms Act.

However, the court acquitted all five accused—including Dr Virendrasinh Sharadchandra Tawde, Sanjiv Gajanan Punalekar, and Vikram Vinay Bhave—of charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 and criminal conspiracy (Section 120B of the IPC).

Dabholkar, founder of the Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti (MANS), a rationalist organisation, was a social worker and a crusader against superstition. He was shot dead on 20 August 2013 by two motorcycle-borne assailants on the Omkareshwar bridge near Pune’s Shanivar Peth area, when he was out on a morning walk.

The initial investigation was handled by the Pune Crime Branch before being transferred to the CBI in 2014.

“(The) present case is very serious and is of national importance. Not only Dr Narendra Dabholkar is assassinated but an attempt is made to finish his ideology,” Friday’s judgment noted. 


Also Read: ‘Those directly involved sentenced, rest let free’ — Narendra Dabholkar’s family on murder case verdict


‘Anti-Hindu’

The judgment references Dabholkar’s role as the force behind the Andhashraddha Nirmulan Bill 2005 (also known as the Anti-Superstition Bill), which was pending before the Maharashtra legislature at the time of his death in August 2013.

The judgment also notes that organisations such as the Sanatan Sanstha and its affiliatesHindu Janjagruti Samiti, Warkari Sampraday, and othersopposed the Bill, considering Dabholkar and MANS “anti-Hindu”. The prosecution cited this enmity between Dabholkar and Sanatan Sanstha as the main motive for murder. 

The Bill was finally passed as an ordinance on 24 August 2013.

The CBI submitted before the court that Dr Virendrasinh Tawde, the first accused, was a coordinator for Sanatan Sanstha in Kolhapur and had personal differences with Dabholkar. Arrested in June 2016, the initial chargesheet against Tawde primarily focused on conspiracy with the co-accused to commit murder.

Andure and Kalaskar were arrested in this case in August and September 2018 respectively. They were both associated with Sanatan Sanstha, and initially arrested by ATS Maharashtra in another crime. The duo was named in the supplementary chargesheet filed in February 2019.

Further investigation also revealed the names of Mumbai-based lawyer Punalekar and his assistant Bhave. In September 2012, according to the judgment, Punalekar had written a letter to Dabholkar, opposing the latter’s views on water pollution due to Ganesh Visarjan. CBI also found that Kalaskar had visited Punalekar’s Mumbai office, where Bhave was also present. The CBI alleged that Bhave arranged for the motorcycle for Andure and Kalaskar to conduct a reconnaissance about 15 days before the incident. Punalekar and Bhave were arrested in May 2019, and were named in another supplementary chargesheet filed in November that year. 

Punalekar was chargesheeted for the offence of destroying evidence. It was alleged that in June 2018, Kalaskar had visited Punalekar’s chamber, when Bhave was also present. Punalekar then allegedly advised Kalaskar to destroy firearms used in murder cases, including in the killing of journalist Gauri Lankesh. Kalaskar then allegedly threw four country-made pistols in a creek. The murder weapon was never recovered.


Also Read: CBI’s flip-flop, lens on Hindutva outfit, probe by multiple agencies — how Dabholkar case unfolded


‘Hindu organisations had bitter enmity’

In their defence, Andure and Kalaskar claimed an alibi, stating they were with their sisters on the day of Dabholkar’s murder because it was Rakshabandhan.

Kalaskar further alleged misconduct by the Anti-Terrorism Squad and CBI. He referenced the Malegaon blasts of 2006 and 2008, claiming ATS officers planted explosives and falsely implicated both Muslims and Hindus in separate cases. His written submissions had accused ATS, referring to cases starting from the year 2006, right up to the case of explosives being planted near industrialist Mukesh Ambani’s residence in 2021. He also claimed that he was tortured by the police during the probe. 

Punalekar also made similar allegations against the ATS. He told the court that since 2008, he had been representing the accused in several cases of explosives registered at Thane, Madgaon, etc. He claimed that ATS had been planting RDX and implicating innocent people.

However, after perusing the examination and cross-examination of certain witnesses, the court said that “it is crystal clear that Sanatan Sanstha, Hindu Janjagruti Samiti, and allied Hindu organisations were nurturing bitter enmity against deceased Dr Narendra Dabholkar.”

The defence had also tried to dispute Dabholkar’s cause of death, claiming that a woman’s “long hair” was found on his body, but no probe was carried out in that direction. The court rejected this contention, asserting that “even after the death of Dr Narendra Dabholkar, the defence has tried to encash every opportunity to tarnish his image”.

The court also deprecated other such attempts by the defence. For instance, it pointed out that one of the defence lawyers referred to a magazine, published by Dabholkar’s MANS, more than 5 years after his death, to emphasise on the movement publicly insulting Hindu god and goddess. This approach, the court said, “is very strange and is condemnable”.

‘Reasonable suspicion’

The prosecution presented two key eyewitnesses in court. One was a Pune Municipal Corporation sweeper working near the crime scene at the time of the attack on Dabholkar. The other was a Pune resident who witnessed the incident from his balcony. The court deemed their testimonies “strong”.

Another witness had claimed that Andure had made an extra-judicial confession to him about murdering Dabholkar. Taking all of these testimonies into consideration, the court concluded that Andure and Kalaskar had indeed shot Dabholkar dead. 

For the other accused, the court said that there was evidence of motive against Tawde and “reasonable suspicion” against Punalekar and Bhave. However, it added that the prosecution had failed to establish their involvement in the crime. 

“Considering the status of the deceased, this case is of national importance. Despite the said fact, casual and negligent approach of PW15 (then Deputy Secretary, Home Department, Mumbai) and PW19 (then Additional Chief Secretary of the Mumbai Home Department), is not only shocking, but requires condemnation,” it observed.

As for the punishment, the government lawyer had not demanded the death penalty for the accused, accepting that this was not a ‘rarest of the rare’ case. The court, therefore, imposed life terms on the two convicts.

As for the UAPA charges, the court found the sanction accorded for prosecution from the Mumbai Home Department, to be “not valid”. This was after the court found that the then deputy secretary of the Home Department, Mumbai, had failed to follow the time limit for the sanction for Tawde, Punalekar, and Bhave, and the then additional chief secretary of the Mumbai Home Department had not “applied his mind” to the CBI’s sanction proposal for Andure and Kalaskar.

(Edited by Mannat Chugh)


Also Read: BJP & Congress spotlight infra development in poll promises amid Pune’s struggles with project delays


 

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular