Palghar lynching: Court orders clubbing of two FIRs

A special court here in Maharashtra has ordered clubbing of two FIRs registered in connection with the lynching of three persons including two sadhus in the Palghar district in April 2020 to avoid wastage of time and resources and to avoid multiplicity of litigationsThe order to club the two FIRs was passed by additional sessions judge Rajesh Gupta on August 12 based on an application filed by the prosecution A copy of the order was made available on SaturdayTaking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case and on the point of material available on record and in view of observations by the Apex Court in case of Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah Vs CBI cited Supra in the interest of justice and to prevent unnecessary wastage of time and resources to avoid multiplicity of litigations the orders thereto passed it would be proper and lawful to conduct a joint trial in respect of CRNo76 amp 77 of 2020On April 16 2020 a mob lynched two sadhus Chikne Maharaj Kalpavrukshagiri 70 and Sushilgiri Maharaj 35 and their driver Nilesh Telgade 30 at Gadchinchale in Palghar district 140 km north of MumbaiThe brutal attack took place rumamidours that child lifters were roaming in the area during the lockdownAlso read Palghar lynching case SC asks Maharashtra police to place fresh charge sheet on recordThe judge noted that two offences were registered for the same crime under various sections of the Indian Penal Code IPC the Destruction of Public Property Act and under the Disaster Management Act and the Epidemic Diseases ActIn his submission special public prosecutor Satish Maneshinde submitted that at the time of registration of the FIR the victims were already dead and therefore section 307 Attempt to murder of the IPC was erroneously registered without verifying facts Investigation in the crime is completed and two chargesheets are filed for both the FIRsThe say of the other side is obtained on the back leaf of the application They have no objection for a joint trial the judge notedAdvocate Amrut Adhikari appearing for the accused submitted there cannot be an amalgamation but needs to continue the crime and that another chargesheet filed to be treated as a supplementary chargesheetIt is apposite to note by the time as submitted by special PP the crime No762020 which was registered under section 307 the three persons were already deadUndisputedly crime no 76 and 77 arises out of the one and the same transaction The crime no76 of 2020 relates to an offence punishable under section 307 of the IPC In fact it ought not to have been registered without verifying the fact of incidence It further appears witnesses in both the cases are common as so the accused persons are the same The document and material relied by the prosecution are also not different the order saidA total of 226 accused are being arraigned for the lynchingThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever