From mix-up in inks, time and dates, to shady witnesses, to lack of proper call data, here was all that was wrong in the G N Saibaba case
Professor G N Saibaba
- Bombay High Court exposed grave flaws in the police investigation
- These flaws suggest potential evidence tampering
- The detailed judgment of the HC reveals numerous lapses by the police
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, which acquitted Delhi University professor G N Saibaba and five others in the Maoist case under UAPA, not only upheld the validity of the trial under UAPA but also exposed grave flaws in the police investigation. These flaws suggest potential evidence tampering to incriminate Saibaba and the other accused.
ADVERTISEMENT
The detailed judgment of the HC reveals numerous lapses by the police, including using illiterate individuals such as sweepers and barbers as witnesses, discrepancies in ink usage in the FIR, inconsistencies in arrest dates and lack of proper documentation, such as failure to mention am and pm during the arrest, not bringing the CDR records on record. Additionally, the absence of seizure videography and inconsistencies in Facebook screenshot dates further cast doubt on the integrity of the investigation.
Former Delhi University professor G N Saibaba is seen with his wife Vasantha Kumari outside the Nagpur Central Jail in 2016. File pic/PTI
The prosecution alleged that the accused were involved in a larger criminal conspiracy with individuals not under arrest, planning to wage war against the Government of India. Seizures from different sets of accused revealed their alleged involvement with terrorist organisations CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF. The court scrutinized the prosecution’s case and identified numerous lapses by the Gadchiroli Police, and ripped them apart.
Also Read: DU Prof GN Saibaba finally acquitted after losing... 3,588 days
The court examined the arrest and seizure of three accused: Mahesh Kariman Tirki, Pandu Narote, and Hem Mishra. According to the police, they were arrested on August 22, 2013, at Aheri bus stand, where incriminating documents were allegedly found. However, the prosecution claimed that Mishra was arrested two days earlier at Balarasha railway station. The defence argued that this discrepancy suggests false implication by the police.
FIR kept blank
The court order highlights several discrepancies in the case. It points out that FIR columns were initially left blank and filled later, indicating manipulation. Additionally, errors in the arrest panchnama cast doubt on its authenticity. Regarding PW-1 Santosh Bawne, a home guard, the court questions his reliability, noting his past involvement as a panch witness. Furthermore, the court observes that Bawne, being illiterate, lacked understanding of seized electronic gadgets. It suggests that alternative independent panch witnesses could have been easily obtained from the bustling Aheri bus stand.
Questioning to FIR in 3 hrs?
The court order scrutinizes the short timeframe between arrest, panchnama, and FIR registration, questioning the prosecution’s claim of authenticity. “All preliminary steps within just 15 minutes,” the court noted, calling it improbable.
Discrepancies in FIR entry
Furthermore, discrepancies in Column No. 3(b) and (c) of the printed FIR, including overwriting, raised doubts. The prosecution failed to provide an explanation, deepening the suspicion, the court remarked.
Different dates, inks, time
The court observed discrepancies in the arrest panchnamas, noting differences in handwriting and ink. There’s doubt regarding the claimed interrogation date of August 20. Witness Atmaram, who met the accused at the railway station, was supposed to hand over cash as per a naxal leader’s instructions. The defence argues that Atmaram should have been made an accused instead of a witness if he was delivering cash as alleged by the police.
CDR not shown on record
The defence argued that the police suppressed the CDR of accused Mahesh Tirki and Pandu Narote’s mobile SIMs, which would reveal their tower locations at Gadchiroli Police Headquarters during the alleged period. The court noted this as a basis for doubting the prosecution’s case regarding the arrest and seizure.
Meanwhile, discrepancies were exposed in the police’s claim of seizing incriminating material from Mishra’s Facebook profile. Screenshots allegedly taken during the arrest were found to be dated before the arrest, casting doubt on the authenticity of the seizure panchnamas.
The court highlighted discrepancies in the arrest of Prashant Rahi and Vijay Tirki, noting that the panch witness, Umaji Chandankhede, admitted to being illiterate and had previously worked as a sweeper at Aheri police station. This raises doubts about his understanding of the seizure panchnama.
Illiterate barber as panch
Similar irregularities were found in the search, seizure, and arrest of DU professor GN Saibaba. The court noted that the panch witness called during the search was a barber outside Delhi University despite others including students being present in the university, casting doubt on his credibility. Despite the presence of senior officers, the video recorded during the searches was never brought on record, raising further suspicions.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
