Mumbai: Panvel court acquits two accused in 2012 Chinchavali farmhouse murder case

Nearly fourteen years after four men were murdered at a Chinchavali farmhouse the Panvel additional sessions court has acquitted the two surviving accused Ramdas Govind Patil 42 and Surendrakumar Rajmani Shukla 59 citing a lack of evidenceIn his recent judgment Additional Sessions Judge Santosh R Chavan held that the prosecution failed to establish a criminal conspiracy firearm supply chain or involvement in charges including murder cheating and Arms Act violationsProceedings against two other coaccused Chandrakant Waghmare and Sanjay Khutle were abated following their deaths during trialDiscovery of bodiesAccording to the prosecution complainant Dattatray Nago Patil owned the threeandahalfacre Patil Farm in Chinchavali managed by watchman Ladku DurgeOn November 10 2012 Dattatray gave the keys to his cousin Ramdas Patil for landrelated dealings Three days later Dattatray received a call from Ramdas who handed the phone to an unknown Marathispeaking man who expressed interest in buying the propertyThe next day after finding his cousinrsquos phone switched off the family sent the watchmanrsquos son Baliram to check the property Baliram discovered a scene of horrific bloodshed prompting Dattatrayrsquos sons to rush to the siteOutside near the parked vehicles Ramdas lay dead from stone strikes Inside the hall three other men mdash Balaram Tople Nitin Joshi and Pritham Gharat mdash were found dead with fatal gunshot wounds to the headAlleged schemeInvestigators alleged that prime accused Waghmare lured the victims by promising a ldquomoneyrainrdquo scheme that would turn Rs 1 lakh into crores Waghmare persuaded them to bring large sums of cash to the farmhouse which he seized before the killingsPolice later claimed to recover Rs 299 lakh clothing a motorcycle and the keys based on Waghmarersquos statement However the court ruled that the prosecution failed to link the surviving accused to the fraud scheme or the murdersUnproved allegationA central part of the prosecutionrsquos case relied on the alleged movement of the countrymade pistol among the accusedThe state claimed Shukla supplied the weapon to Khutle who passed it to Ramdas Govind Patil who then handed it to Waghmare to commit the murders The prosecution argued that despite Waghmarersquos death during trial the collected evidence sufficiently proved the surviving duorsquos role in the supply chainThe defence countered that no evidence linked the surviving accused to the weapon transfer or the murders asserting the state failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt Upon evaluating the material the court held that the prosecution failed to establish the alleged chain of firearm transfers or prove the surviving accusedrsquos involvement in the killingsWitnesses examinedThe prosecution examined three witnesses complainant Dattatray Patil who described the farmhouse handover of its keys and discovery of the bodies Dr Bhushan Jain who conducted the postmortems and investigating officer Sunil Bajare who detailed the probe and seizures allegedly linked to a statement by the deceased prime accusedMedical evidence established that Tople Joshi and Gharat died of gunshot injuries to the head while Ramdas Patil died of injuries caused by a stone However the court held that proving the deaths were homicidal did not establish the surviving accusedrsquos involvement beyond a reasonable doubtThe surviving accusedThe court held that the prosecution failed to prove charges under the IPC Arms Act and Mumbai Police Act against either surviving accused acquitting both under Section 2351 of the CrPCTheir bail bonds were cancelled but each was directed under Section 437A to furnish a Rs 50000 personal bond and surety to ensure their appearance before a higher court if requiredThe judgment concludes the trial against the two surviving accused with the court finding insufficient evidence to establish their involvement in the four murders or related offencesPolice SpeakBala Kumbhar Senior PI Panvel City policelsquoWe will go through the order copy and consult our police prosecutor and only then I will be able to make any comment on this matterrsquoRashmi Nandedkar DCP Zone III PanvellsquoI am yet to get the court order I will study the same and then decide on the further course of actionrsquo