'Meant To Strike Terror': Bombay High Court Denies Bail To Vet Accused In Amravati Murder Over Nupur Sharma Post

While denying bail to one of the prime accused in the 2022 brutal murder of pharmacist Umesh Kolhe by a group of Muslim men over his support to the controversial statements made by former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma against Prophet Mohammed, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday held that the offence was heinous, and strikes at the conscious of the society. A division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Shyam Chandak refused to grant bail to Yusuf Khan, a veterinary doctor, who had circulated an 'instigative' post against Kolhe calling for 'teaching a lesson' to the latter for supporting Sharma's comments on Prophet Mohammed. "Undoubtedly, the offence alleged is grave and heinous in nature. Such offences affect the very core and conscious of the society, make it vulnerable and think to live in constant fear. Having reached to this prima facie opinion, we are not inclined to exercise the discretion of bail in favour of the Appellant," the judges observed in the order. According to the prosecution case, while there was huge controversy and communal tensions in the society after Sharma's comments on a TV debate show, several persons supporting her views were threatened and were made to apologise. Similarly, Kolhe a veterinary pharmacist in Amravati district, had made a post in a WhatsApp group of which Khan was also a member.Unhappy with Kolhe's remarks, Khan took a screenshot of his post and circulated the same while adding his own views, which read as: “Amit Medical Prabhat Takiz Tehsil ke Samane isko batana hain ke jin logon ke bharose kamai ki unse hi dushmani ka anjam kya hota hai, is message ko zyada se zyada group or gore walo ko send kare.” (Owner of Amit Medical in front of Prabhat Talkies, needs to understand what is the result of enmity with those who give him an earning, share this message as much possible)With this message, Khan circulated his post in several WhatsApp groups including one titled 'Black Freedom' and also sent it to some individuals, which the prosecution contended indicated his intent to instigate people to take some revenge from Kolhe. However, Khan maintained that he only urged Muslim veterinary doctors and others involved in the field to adversely affect Kolhe's business by boycotting his shop.However, the judges in their 21-page judgment, noted that soon after circulating his post, Khan met one of the accused persons (A-5), who then forwarded the same post to his group members and other accused persons and held 'conspiracy' meetings, in one of which it was decided to 'behead' Kolhe for supporting Sharma's comments. "Considering the material on record, prima facie it appears that, a terrorist gang was formed by the accused persons under the leadership of A-7 to avenge the alleged dishonour of their faith by the deceased, by brutally killing him and to strike terror into the hearts and minds of general public irrespective of whether they supported the spokesperson's comment or not," the judges held. In the judgment, authored by Justice Chandak, the judges have dismissed the argument made by Khan, that he met A-5 only once and was not part of any of the conspiracy meetings and thus had no knowledge of the conspiracy to kill Kolhe."However, that itself is not sufficient to accept that the Appellant (Kolhe) has been innocent or was not part of the conspiracy to eliminate the deceased. Because, from the material on record it appears that, after igniting the anger with his instigating message, the Appellant shrewdly kept himself away from co-accused till the commission of murder, so that he cannot be held responsible for the crime. The 25 phone calls exchanged between him and A-5, also indicates the same. Meaning, the Appellant was quietly active behind the curtain," the judges observed. The Appellant was not present in a particular meeting with certain other accused is not material, as conspiracy can be inferred and proved by circumstantial evidence also, the judges said, while emphasising, "Conspiracies are secretly planned and direct evidence is therefore difficult to produce. However, the Court for the purpose of arriving at a finding as to whether the said offence has been committed or not, must bear in mind that meeting of the minds is essential; mere knowledge or discussion would not be."All these circumstances, the judges opined, showed that there was a meeting of minds by the Appellant and the other accused persons to hatch the criminal conspiracy to kill the deceased which they did at the end. With these findings, the bench refused to grant bail to Khan.Appearance:Advocates Yug Chaudhry, Sharif Shaikh, Afrin Khan, Muzammil Shaikh, Ejaz Shaikh, Anush Shetty, Muskan Shaikh, Benazir Khan and Mateen Shaikh appeared for the Appellant. Additional Public Prosecutor Madhavi Mhatre represented the State.Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh assisted by Advocates Chintan Shah, Aditya Thakkar, Sandeep Sadawarte, Prasanna Bhangale and Krishnakand Deshmukh represented the NIA.Case...

'Meant To Strike Terror': Bombay High Court Denies Bail To Vet Accused In Amravati Murder Over Nupur Sharma Post

Narsi Benwal

Tags