MUMBAI: City police met the ire of a court after saying an alleged Chhota Shakeel marksman he had been on the run for 20 years since being charged with murder, but it turned out the man had been incarcerated as a subtrial in another case for at least five of those years.
This discrepancy was cited as one reason by the court which acquitted Ashraf Siddiqui, 43, of the 1999 killing of Wahid Ali Khan, chairman of the Bombay Aman Committee.
The prosecution had alleged that Siddiqui fled after the crime and was arrested on 29 May 2019. However, the court referred to a ruling dated 14 February 2019 in another case where the DCB, CID, Mumbai had charged Siddiqui and two others conspired to kill gangster DK Rao and one Ashok. It said police had trapped and arrested Siddiqui, who in this case was fired, on September 3, 2014.
“Then how the police failed to trace him when he was in jail? The police failed to find him even though they keep the record of the fleeing defendant and the UTP [under trial prisoner]. It is an undisclosed mystery for the reason best known to the police agency,” the court said.
The MCOCA nod for sharpshooter is rejected by the court
In the 1999 murder case of Bombay Aman Committee chairman, a city court noted that the Detection Crime Branch-CID, Mumbai had filed the complaint, alleging that the prime accused Ashraf Siddiqui had been on the run for two decades.
Pointing to a 2019 ruling in a case where the alleged Chhota Shakel sharpshooter was shown arrested in 2014 by DCB-CID himself, the court said: “If so, why is the prosecution saying that this accused was on the run? According to the register kept in the police station, the police allegedly should have possessed the knowledge about this fact. This fact also raised doubts about the case of the prosecution history. Regarding the personal search and recovery of the cell phone and SIM card from the defendant, nothing incriminating was recorded to connect this defendant with the alleged incident,” the court said, while acquitting Siddiqui of murdering Bombay Aman Committee chairman.
Represented by lawyers Mithilesh Mishra, CR Mishra and SC Mishra, Siddiqui denied the allegations.
The court also refused to accept the penalty order issued by then city police chief Sanjay Barve in 2019 for invoking the strict MCOCA against Siddiqui. The court said that Barve’s approach was very surprising and the penalty order was passed in a very haphazard manner.
“The granting of the sanction is not a formality. It must be given after examining the records and every detail … must be studied by the competent authority. At the time of cross-examination, this witness [Barve] admitted that a previous indictment was filed against the two defendants in… 2000, but did not verify the same before approving the sanctioning order…,” the court said. -Rebecca Samervel
This discrepancy was cited as one reason by the court which acquitted Ashraf Siddiqui, 43, of the 1999 killing of Wahid Ali Khan, chairman of the Bombay Aman Committee.
The prosecution had alleged that Siddiqui fled after the crime and was arrested on 29 May 2019. However, the court referred to a ruling dated 14 February 2019 in another case where the DCB, CID, Mumbai had charged Siddiqui and two others conspired to kill gangster DK Rao and one Ashok. It said police had trapped and arrested Siddiqui, who in this case was fired, on September 3, 2014.
“Then how the police failed to trace him when he was in jail? The police failed to find him even though they keep the record of the fleeing defendant and the UTP [under trial prisoner]. It is an undisclosed mystery for the reason best known to the police agency,” the court said.
The MCOCA nod for sharpshooter is rejected by the court
In the 1999 murder case of Bombay Aman Committee chairman, a city court noted that the Detection Crime Branch-CID, Mumbai had filed the complaint, alleging that the prime accused Ashraf Siddiqui had been on the run for two decades.
Pointing to a 2019 ruling in a case where the alleged Chhota Shakel sharpshooter was shown arrested in 2014 by DCB-CID himself, the court said: “If so, why is the prosecution saying that this accused was on the run? According to the register kept in the police station, the police allegedly should have possessed the knowledge about this fact. This fact also raised doubts about the case of the prosecution history. Regarding the personal search and recovery of the cell phone and SIM card from the defendant, nothing incriminating was recorded to connect this defendant with the alleged incident,” the court said, while acquitting Siddiqui of murdering Bombay Aman Committee chairman.
Represented by lawyers Mithilesh Mishra, CR Mishra and SC Mishra, Siddiqui denied the allegations.
The court also refused to accept the penalty order issued by then city police chief Sanjay Barve in 2019 for invoking the strict MCOCA against Siddiqui. The court said that Barve’s approach was very surprising and the penalty order was passed in a very haphazard manner.
“The granting of the sanction is not a formality. It must be given after examining the records and every detail … must be studied by the competent authority. At the time of cross-examination, this witness [Barve] admitted that a previous indictment was filed against the two defendants in… 2000, but did not verify the same before approving the sanctioning order…,” the court said. -Rebecca Samervel
