Supreme Court questions Maharashtra over exclusive MCOCA courts, sets deadline for 2017 corporator murder case
A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi asked the counsel appearing for the Maharashtra government opposing the bail plea of Prashant Bhaskar Mahatre, the alleged main conspirator in the corporator murder case, in jail for the past eight years, as to why the state has not created additional courts for trial under special statutes.
"We have been saying this time and again, if you are enacting a special statute, then you have to create additional infrastructure for the trial of those cases. There has to be speedy trial of cases under special statutes. Why are you not creating additional infrastructure and setting up special courts for MCOCA cases? Why are you allowing gangsters to operate from jail," the bench asked the counsel on Friday (July 18, 2025).
The top court said that in another Maharashtra case, the court flagged an urgent need to have special courts for trial of cases under the NIA Act, MCOCA and UAPA or else the courts will be forced to release the accused on bail due to delay in completion of trials.
The counsel submitted that they have pruned the list of witnesses, of which only 30 key ones remain to be examined. He said that since March 2025, when the court issued notice in the matter, they have examined 24 witnesses in the murder case.
The bench recorded the submission of the counsel and noted that the accused had 16 criminal cases against him, of which he has been acquitted in 13, and has been accused of attacking the deceased even in 2013 due to a political rivalry between them. The top court said the trial has to be completed by January 31, 2026, and if the trial is not completed by then, he can move the application for bail.
The bench, which asked the trial court to hear the case twice in a month, directed the defence counsels to cooperate with the trial court and not seek unnecessary adjournments.
On May 16, the top court expressed concern over large numbers of prosecution witnesses turning hostile in the case and said due to the deteriorating character of society, people nowadays are not ready to stand for the truth.
It has asked the Maharashtra police to prune the list of 200 witnesses mentioned in the charge sheet and ensure that only crucial witnesses are examined to bring home the conviction of the accused.
The Bombay High Court dismissed Mr. Mahatre's bail plea on February 7, saying, "...the confessional statements of all the accused persons do indicate that the said applicant could be said to be the main conspirator in the present case."
It referred to a statement of Mr. Mahatre's driver, according to which, Mr. Mahatre, being a cousin of the victim, had a longstanding political rivalry with him, and that even in 2013, he, along with others, had assaulted the corporater.
The high court said, "...the material on record does make out a prima facie case against the applicant as being the main conspirator, who motivated the other accused persons to join him, in order to launch a brutal assault on the victim, which resulted in his death. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the application filed by the applicant-accused No.10 and accordingly, it is dismissed."
According to the FIR, the victim, Manoj Mahatre, a three-time Congress party corporator from Bhiwandi-Nizampur Municipal Corporation, was brutally assaulted on February 14, 2017, by a firearm as well as sickles and choppers.
Manoj's driver in his complaint stated that after the assault, the accused fled, some of them in a Maruti Swift car, which was kept on standby.
Police later arrested Prashant Bhaskar Mahatre and seven others in connection with the murder.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
41 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘MVA failure to oppose Urban Naxal Bill in Assembly sent wrong message, it must hit streets now': CPI(M)'s Dhawale
The smooth passage of the Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill in the state Assembly recently saw the members of the Opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA), which includes the Congress, NCP(SP) and Shiv Sena (UBT), failing to even express their dissent against the legislation dubbed as 'Urban Naxal Bill', which seeks 'effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of Left-wing extremist organisations'. The only dissenter from the Opposition ranks on the floor of the House was CPI(M) MLA Vinod Nikole. The Bill's critics have warned that it grants sweeping powers to the State that could criminalise dissent and ideological activity under the pretext of curbing Naxalism, raising fears of arbitrary arrests. In an interview with The Indian Express, CPI(M) Politburo member and All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) chief Ashok Dhawale says the MSPS Bill marks a 'direct assault on democratic rights and civil liberties', calling the MVA MLAs' silence in the House 'unfortunate'. Excerpts: The CPI(M) has come out strongly against the MSPS Bill. Could you explain the reasons behind your opposition? We are completely opposed to this Bill. At its core, it is a direct attack on democratic rights and civil liberties. The government is using the so-called 'urban Naxal' threat as a red herring, an excuse to target dissent and silence critics of the ruling BJP and their corporate backers. Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has publicly stated that the Naxal issue in Maharashtra is confined to just two tehsils in Gadchiroli. Union Home Minister Amit Shah also has publicly stated that the Naxalite Maoist problem has largely been eliminated nationwide. So, the question arises if the threat is under control, why this new law now? The government claims it is a security measure. Are you saying there is more to it? This law is not about security, it is about silencing voices. There are already enough draconian laws in place — UAPA at the national level, and MCOCA in Maharashtra. Some provisions in this new Bill are even more draconian than UAPA. So clearly, it's not about lack of legal tools. We believe this is being brought in to suppress growing people's movements in the state like the farmers fighting against land acquisition for the Shaktipeeth Highway, or resistance to corporate-led projects in Dharavi, Wadhwan port, and areas like Gadchiroli and Chandrapur. These projects, pushed by big corporates, especially mining projects in districts like Gadchiroli and Chandrapur for which land acquisition process has started, often violate forest and land rights. The Bill is a tool to criminalise these legitimate struggles. While you have criticised the Mahayuti government, several of your own allies in the MVA have been criticised for not opposing the Bill. What is your take? The record of the MVA who are our allies has been mixed. I would describe what happened in the Assembly as unfortunate. However, to be fair, several top MVA leaders joined earlier protests against this Bill. On June 3, there was a massive dharna at Azad Maidan, and leaders like Supriya Sule, Jayant Patil, and Uddhav Thackeray were present where they were categorical about their opposition to the Bill. On April 22, nearly 50,000 people protested against this Bill across Maharashtra. Though that was a Left-led call, many MVA leaders joined in solidarity. However, we were disappointed that when the Bill was introduced in the Assembly, only our MLA Vinod Nikole of the CPI(M) stood up to oppose it. Not a single MLA from the MVA bloc spoke out. On the same day we had an online meeting with NCP (SP) leader Jayant Patil and we raised this issue with him. We were told that several MVA MLAs who were part of the Select Committee had already opposed the Bill in that House Committee. But we believe that not opposing it on the Assembly floor sent the wrong message. It has not gone down well with the people of the state. To their credit, the very next day in the Legislative Council, the MVA rectified this mistake, where they unitedly opposed the Bill and walked out in protest. That act did some damage control, and we welcomed it. What are your expectations from the MVA now? And, are you planning to take any legal recourse against the Bill? Of course, we will examine legal options, but we are realistic. Generally, courts do not interfere in legislative processes. So we are not placing much emphasis on legal challenges. The real battle is on the streets. The farm laws passed by Parliament were ultimately repealed through mass struggle. Similarly, if we want to defeat this draconian Bill, we need a broad-based, united mass movement. We are trying to bring all forces together to make that happen. Speeches alone will not see the end of this Bill. We, including the major constituents of the MVA, will need to hit the streets. We are trying to persuade them. Let us see what happens. Would you like some provisions of the Bill to be diluted, or you want the bill to be repealed? The government had called for suggestions and objections to this Bill and it received 12,500 suggestions. Out of these, 9000 suggestions sought a complete scrapping of the Bill while another 3,000 called for amendments. We believe that the Bill in its entirety is harmful for the citizens of the state. We are not protesting so that the government tweak this law — we want it to be thrown out entirely.
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Orissa HC issues SOP for judicial officers on extension pleas in time-bound cases, bars direct SC communication
CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has issued a standard operating procedure (SOP) for judicial officers across the state to streamline the process of seeking extensions in time-bound judicial matters, following directions from the Supreme Court. The move is aimed to bring uniformity and transparency to the extension process in time-bound cases, ensuring judicial discipline and institutional oversight in compliance with the Supreme Court's directive. The SOP, notified by registrar general Asanta Kumar Das, is in response to observations made by the apex court in a case on May 23. The court expressed concern over direct communications from trial court judges to its registry, a practice deemed 'wholly unacceptable'. It clarified that such communications must be routed through the high court's registry. The newly issued SOP mandates that all judicial officers, including district judges and judges of family courts, must submit extension requests via official email and regular mode to the registrar (judicial) of the high court. These requests must include case details, current status, reasons for delay and the period of extension sought, formatted as per a prescribed annexure. For cases monitored by the Supreme Court, the high court registrar (judicial) will forward the request to the appropriate officer in the apex court's registry. Direct communication by any presiding officer with the Supreme Court registry is strictly prohibited. The SOP emphasises accountability, stating that repeated or unjustified delays may invite administrative scrutiny. Further, district judges and the registrar (judicial) are tasked with monthly monitoring of such cases and maintaining records for periodic reporting to the court.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Rajiv Tandon & Prof. Shan on the Future of Digital Learning
From 'Show Proof' To 'No Objection': Pak's Stunning U-Turn On TRF Linked To Pahalgam Terror Attack In a stunning reversal, Pakistan has quietly accepted the US decision to brand The Resistance Front (TRF) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Just months ago, Islamabad had blocked any mention of TRF in a UN Security Council statement on the Pahalgam attack, despite TRF openly claiming responsibility. Back then, Pakistan demanded "more proof." But now, Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar says, 'We have no issue' with the US move. India has long argued TRF is a Lashkar-e-Taiba proxy and pushed the UN to act. The sudden shift in Pakistan's stance has raised questions, is Islamabad trying to escape global scrutiny? Or is it finally cracking under pressure? India, which banned TRF in 2023 under UAPA, wants real action, not just statements.#pakistantrfdefence #pahalgamattack #trf #lashkaretaiba #terrorism #uspakrelations #indiaus #jammuandkashmir #terrorinpakistan #globalterrorism #modivsisis #trfdesignated #foreignterroristorganization #toi #toibharat #bharat #trending #breakingnews #indianews 10.8K views | 3 hours ago
