The Bombay High Court on November 21 took the Government of Maharashtra to task for not filing a report even though the investigation into the disappearance of Ghatkopar blast accused Khwaja Yunus has concluded, and came heavily down upon the police for ‘misleading’ the court earlier.
The High Court said, “There was a clear attempt to mislead the court” regarding a B Summary application filed by the state in the Parner court. It gave the state government 15 days to state what action it proposes to take in the case, failing which the court “would pass orders” during the next hearing on December 6.
The Division Bench comprising Justice R M S Khandeparkar and Justice Amjad Sayed observed that the case at Parner had nothing to do with the investigation of the original complaint filed in the Ghatkopar police station in 2004 following the disappearance of Yunus.
“If the investigation is complete, it’s your duty to file the report,” Justice Khandeparkar said, adding, “There was a clear attempt to mislead the court on September 3 this year.”
On October 8, 2007, the state had sought time to go through the Parner court judgment, which had classified the complaint filed by suspended crime branch officer Sachin Waze as a B summary case, and said the complaint was “maliciously false”.
Waze had filed a complaint following the disappearance of Yunus, a software engineer, stating that he (Yunus) had escaped after the vehicle in which he was being taken to Aurangabad met with an accident in January 2003.
In a petition before the court, Yunus’s mother Aasiya Begum alleged that her son – arrested in connection with the December 2, 2002 Ghatkopar blast – was killed in police custody in the first week of January 2003. The CID, which probed Yunus’ disappearance, too has concluded that he died in custody.
Public Prosecutor Satish Borulkar informed the High Court that the ad-hoc Sessions Judge at Ahmednagar had stayed the Parner court order on November 1. The High Court then directed the Sessions Judge to expedite Waze’s application against the Parner court order within six weeks and submit a report in two weeks thereafter.
During arguments, Borulkar submitted that the investigation into the Yunus case is complete but chargesheet is yet to be filed. When the court asked why no chargesheet had been filed, Borulkar replied that the state had been waiting for the Parner court judgment to see whether Waze’s complaint was genuine or not.
On September 3, the state had sought time regarding sanction for prosecution of police officers as the B Summary proceedings were pending at the Parner court. The court at that time had observed that it was not informed about the proceedings initiated by the state government.