The victims have challenged the FIR inconsistencies and police narrative
Dinesh Panchkale (left) Chandrashekar Panchkale (right) showing the X-ray. Pics/Nimesh Dave
- On January 22 two individuals were attacked and brutally beaten by a mob
- The victims claim the police are protecting the assailants
- Despite identifying the attackers, their names were omitted from the FIR
An incident unfolded on January 22 where two individuals Dinesh and Chandrashekar Panchkale were attacked and brutally beaten by a mob during a cricket match at Bangur Nagar. The victims claim the police are protecting the assailants by providing inaccurate information. Despite identifying the attackers, their names were omitted from the FIR.
ADVERTISEMENT
Dinesh sustained severe injuries, including skull fractures, while Chandrashekar suffered an arm fracture. Post-hospitalisation, Dinesh's family is anxious about his health, noting memory loss and hearing problems. Concerns have arisen due to alleged inconsistencies in the case information.
FIR raises questions
“On Monday, I attended court, and was surprised, that section 307 was not mentioned in the FIR, raising questions about whether the police are intentionally shielding the accused. Even my lawyer questioned the absence of an FIR under my name. The police's motives in protecting the accused remain unclear, but as far as I'm aware, those the police claim are on the run are still present in the settlement and not evading authorities,” said Panchkale one of the victims.
“We provided the police with the attacker's names, but they filed an FIR against an unidentified person. Despite about 50 people involved, only five were initially caught, with the sixth accused arrested later. My brother suffered severe head fractures in the assault by the mob,” added Panchkale.
Police refute allegations
“Don't you trust the police? We have added section 307 in the FIR but it will not be seen in the FIR copy as the section was added later and during such cases, a letter from the police is sent to the court and the final sections will be seen in the charge sheet.” ACP Renuka Bagade said.
When this reporter disclosed that during a bail application hearing in Dindoshi court, it was found out that section 307 was not added, the ACP asked the reporter to contact the senior PI about the same.
Pramod Tawade, senior PI, Bangur Nagar Police station said “I hastily reviewed the FIR sections, mistakenly associating Section 307 with the wrong FIR as it shared similarities with another case. Subsequently, I realised my error, acknowledging that I had provided inaccurate information without cross-checking the FIR numbers.”
Why 307 was not included?
“The criteria for inclusion of Section 307 were not met as the quarrel had started over a person standing on the pitch of another cricket match. The matter escalated but there was no original intention of murder. The punishment for sections 307 and 326 are similar and hence there will be no injustice in the matter,” said the senior PI.
Cops clarify human error
“There was a typing mistake from our end. the person typing the FIR mentioned only one individual instead of 3 unidentified individuals. In terms of why a second FIR wasn’t filed, it is because one incident validates only a single FIR. The other victim becomes the witness to the crime. in no case, a second FIR is registered for the same incident,” added the senior PI.
Status of the case
“We had arrested six individuals in total out of which two are released on bail while the other four are still in judicial custody. We are also constantly trying to track other five individuals in the same case and have declared them to be wanted. We are positive that these 5 individuals will be arrested soon,” said the senior PI.
Jan 22
Date when the assault happened
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
