Gurugram: Monu Manesar, the cow vigilante lodged in a Rajasthan jail in connection with the alleged murders of Nasir and Junaid, was pressuring the duo for “protection money”, and “the entire conspiracy of their abduction and killing was prepared and executed on his directions,” the prosecution said, while opposing his bail plea.
Manesar’s bail plea was dismissed 30 September by Vijay Singh Mahawer, additional district and session judge, Kaman, Rajasthan. ThePrint has accessed a copy of the order.
Manesar alias Mohit Yadav (29), a resident of Manesar in Gurugram district, had moved the application before the judge after a similar plea was rejected by the lower court on 19 September.
He was arrested 12 September by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of Nuh police — which is probing the 31 July communal clash — over his alleged “inflammatory speeches” on social media. The next day, Rajasthan police took Manesar on remand in connection with the Nasir-Junaid murder case.
Nasir and Junaid, residents of Ghatmeeka village in Bharatpur district, left their homes on the night of 14 February, and their charred bodies were discovered in a vehicle on 16 February. The men were allegedly beaten to death by gau rakshaks over suspicions of cow smuggling.
An FIR was registered on 16 February at the Gopalganj police station under under IPC sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with deadly weapons), 149 (unlawful assembly), 335 (causing grievous hurt), 364 (kidnapping), and 365 (kidnapping to confine a person), the court order showed.
The other sections invoked were 367 (kidnapping for subjecting the person to grievous hurt), 368 (concealing a kidnapped person), 302 (murder), 201 (destroying evidence), and 120-B (criminal conspiracy).
According to the court order denying Manesar bail, the FIR lodged on the complaint of Junaid’s cousin Ismail (only first names mentioned) stated that he was at a tea shop on 15 February morning when someone informed him that 8-10 people stopped a Bolero vehicle passing through the Peeruka forest area near Gopalganj, and beat up its two occupants.
Ismail, according to the order, said he tried to call both Nasir and Junaid but their phones were switched off. “I called my family in our village Ghatmika who immediately rushed to Ferozepur Jhirka in another vehicle. We went to the Peeruka forest area where we found pieces of smashed glass from a vehicle.”
Some bystanders repeated how two men in a Bolero car were assaulted and taken away, along with their vehicle, by a group. “The bystanders also revealed the names of some of the assailants,” Ismail said in his complaint, mentioning some names.
In his bail plea, Manesar said he was falsely implicated in the case. Claiming he was in Gurugram on the day of the incident, he maintained that he was named under political pressure and that no incriminating act was attributed to him in the FIR.
Opposing his bail plea, additional public prosecutor (APP) Sharif Khan argued that through the other accused, Manesar was pressuring Nasir and Junaid to pay him protection money regularly and that Junaid had shared this with his wife days before his murder.
Khan said that on 14 February, Shrikant and Rinku Saini abducted and killed Nasir and Junaid, in connivance with the other accused.
He said the two men had similarly assaulted others on Monu Manesar’s directions, adding that the latter had three other cases pending against him.
Also read: Not just vigilantes: How gau rakshaks like Monu Manesar fuel Haryana govt’s cow protection drive
What court said
The court said it came out that Manesar had chatted with Saini on WhatsApp about the Bolero vehicle in which Nasir and Junaid were found dead.
The court observed that the analysis of mobile phones also confirmed that on 16 February, Manesar told Saini to keep his phone switched off.
It further said that on the basis of the police investigation, the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC, call details, seizures, analysis of mobile phones and DNA reports, Manesar’s involvement in the crime was prima facie indicated.
The court said that since Manesar is charged with a heinous crime, he could intimidate witnesses if he was given the benefit of bail.
Citing several judgments of the Supreme Court, the court said that for giving the benefit of bail to an accused, their criminal background and other circumstances must be taken into consideration.
(Edited by Smriti Sinha)
Also read: ‘Not a clean chit’: Rajasthan cops on backfoot after Monu Manesar left off Bhiwani suspects list