Maharashtra cop faces court ire over false evidence in complaint against TV serial
The division bench of Justices Ravindra V Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad, said, "This deepens the controversy since, prima facie, it appears that the Police Inspector acted high-handedly while issuing the notice." The court instructed Inspector Prafull Wagh to present the supposed complainant with identification.The media house submitted that they checked the address of the 'complainant', Sunil Mahendra Sharma, but no such person resided at the address specified in the complaint.The bench said that "this deepens the controversy since, prima facie, it appears that the inspector acted high-handedly while issuing the notice" to the media conglomerate. The bench directed the inspector, Prafull Wagh, to bring Sunil Mahendra Sharma to court along with his aadhar card, voter card, and proof of his permanent address.Wagh brought a person who he claimed was Sunil Mahendra Sharma. However, when the court examined his identity card, the bench realised that it was of Mahendra Sanjay Sharma and not Sunil.To get further clarity, the bench handed over paper to the man to sign on the page to compare his signature with those appearing on the complaint.The man signed on paper thrice, each time giving different signatures.After going through the same, the bench said, "Prima facie, we find that this man, Mahendra Sanjay Sharma, has been produced by Police Officer Wagh as a proxy in the court. He is not the complainant... His three signatures do not match the signature on the complaint."The addresses on two of the man's identity cards were of different addresses, but none matched with the address on the complaint.All this while, the man in court claimed that he had prepared the complaint and signed on it. "This is yet another lie," said the court, adding,"This matter not only needs investigation, but also an inquiry as to the behavior and conduct of the Police Officer Wagh."The bench further observed, "It is very disturbing for the Court to record the conduct and behaviour of the cop. "Any attempt to hoodwink the Court and produce an impostor before the Court with the object of snatching an order, based on misinformation or wrong information, cannot be countenanced," the bench observed.The bench directed the police officer as well as the complainant to file affidavits and will hear the case again on July 28.- EndsMust Watch
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
5 hours ago
- India Today
When terror walks free: 7/11 verdict and crisis of India's criminal justice system
Nearly two decades after the deadly 7/11 Mumbai train blasts, which killed over 180 people and injured more than 800, the Bombay High Court's decision to acquit all 12 convicted accused has sent shockwaves across the country. While judicial independence and the rule of law are the pillars of our democracy, the complete collapse of the criminal justice system in a case of this magnitude raises grave questions—not just legal, but also national September 2015, after a nine-year-long investigation led by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), a special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court convicted 12 of 13 accused in connection with the coordinated bombings. Five were sentenced to death, seven to life imprisonment, and one was acquitted. One of the death-row convicts later died in 2021 in jail due to COVID-19. However, on 21st July 2025, the High Court ruled that the prosecution had 'utterly failed' to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, and acquitted all 12, including the Hurdles Then, Judicial Acquittal NowThe court's observations on the unreliability of eyewitness testimonies, delayed identifications, lack of corroborative material, and doubts over the voluntariness of confessions are rooted in procedural rigour. It is worth noting that the special court found sufficient ground for conviction based on the same evidence. To summarily discard all evidence and confession-based inputs is not only unfair to the victims and the investigation but also potentially dangerous. These were not petty offenders; they were individuals linked to known terrorist organisations. To assume they will peacefully reintegrate into society is nave. On the contrary, there is a very real and chilling possibility that their release could enable them to re-establish ties with militant networks and plot future attacks under the cover of judicial Trust, Empowering TerrorThis verdict impacts more than just victims' families or police credibility; it undermines public trust in the entire criminal justice system. When justice appears denied in major terror cases, people begin to lose faith in due process, leading to calls for media trials or even extrajudicial actions, as seen in the Hyderabad rapists encounter case. This risks pushing India toward a vigilante mindset where emotion overrides judgments also weaken India's global image as a nation tough on terrorism. Actions like the Balakot strikes, Operation Sindoor, and strong declarations such as 'Any act of terror will be considered an act of war' projected strength, but the 7/11 acquittals create an impression, both domestically and abroad, that India remains a 'soft state' on agencies like the ATS and NIA, the outcome is deeply demoralizing. Years of high-risk investigation and sacrifice feel dismissed, potentially deterring future action. At a time of rising global threats, India cannot afford a justice system that weakens morale and signals impunity to its and National Security Must CoexistThis is not an argument for abandoning due process or fair trial, but a call for judicial sensitivity in cases involving national trauma and security threats. A purely procedural lens risks undermining public trust, morale, and the Supreme Court staying the Bombay High Court's acquittal in the 7/11 case on July 24, 2025, it must now re-examine the matter with a security-conscious approach. Mass-casualty terrorism cannot go unpunished, nor can suspects be freed only to rejoin militant acquittals are a wake-up call for systemic reform across investigation, prosecution, and colonial-era criminal justice system, rooted in rigid procedures and outdated evidentiary norms, is ill-equipped for modern terrorism. Terrorists exploit encrypted tools and leave little evidence, yet the system still demands traditional proofs like eyewitnesses years protecting civil liberties remains vital, blind adherence to outdated norms must not compromise justice in high-risk national security Must IntrospectThe recent acquittal compels the judiciary to engage in serious self-reflection. How can two courts, examining the same evidence, arrive at such radically different outcomes—one imposing death sentences, the other granting complete acquittals? This stark divergence raises troubling concerns about the consistency, objectivity and internal coherence of our justice delivery system. Was the evidence so ambiguous that it led to a miscarriage of justice at the trial stage? Or does this contradiction reflect deeper issues, such as subjective judicial interpretation or the sway of elite legal advocacy?The involvement of Dr. S. Muralidhar, former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court and now Senior Advocate, in representing two terror-accused adds complexity. While fair legal representation is a fundamental right, the participation of a former top judge raises ethical and institutional concerns. His stature could unintentionally influence judicial peers or affect how proceedings are perceived. Even without legal impropriety, such involvement in high-stakes cases calls for regulatory scrutiny toensure judicial processes remain above reproach, both in law and in public perception, especially in matters of national Reforms NeededTo protect India's internal security and ensure justice in terrorism cases, judicial reform and institutional introspection are essential. The criminal justice system comprises of the police, prosecution, and judiciary. While courts often question the competence of investigators and prosecutors, they too must be held accountable, especially in high-stakes terror trials and sensitive criminal investigative agencies like the ATS and state intelligence wings, though rooted in colonial-era policing, have tried to keep pace with changing technology like electronic surveillance, cyber forensics, and multilingual intelligence, the judiciary must now catch up to ensure these technological advances result in effective convictions and timely like the UAPA, MCOCA, and CrPC are evolving to address encrypted data, foreign handlers, and proxy warfare. Yet, judicial delays, inconsistent rulings, and external influences continue to hinder must include specialized training not only for investigators but also for judges and prosecutors in national security law to help balance civil liberties with national interest. Simultaneously strengthening witness protection and forensic protocols is equally crucial. Eyewitnesses mostly succumb to threats even from big criminals, not to mention terrorists having support from our neighbouring country. While the investigative and legal frameworks are adapting, the judiciary must evolve in parallel to preserve coherence, credibility, and integrity in India's fight against isn't about overriding judicial independence, but aligning it with modern security needs. Justice cannot function in isolation, blind to its consequences. The 7/11 acquittals are more than a legal outcome; they test India's institutional the Supreme Court staying the High Court's order, it must now revisit the case not just in legal terms, but in the spirit of national accountability. Can a system that finds no one guilty for Mumbai's deadliest train attack truly claim to have delivered justice?India must ensure its justice system is not only fair and impartial, but alert, modern, and strong enough to face any challenge, including terrorism. The time to introspect is now.(Ashok Kumar is a Retd IPS officer and former DGP of Uttarakhand. He is presently serving as Vice Chancellor of the Sports University of Haryana, Rai, Sonipat, Haryana.)- Ends(Views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author)Must Watch
New Indian Express
11 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Senior TDP leader Ashok Gajapathi Raju sworn in as Governor of Goa
VIJAYAWADA: Senior Telugu Desam Party leader and former Civil Aviation Minister Ashok Gajapathi Raju was sworn in as the Governor of Goa on Saturday, succeeding PS Sreedharan Pillai. Ashok Gajapathi Raju took the oath of office at Raj Bhavan in Panaji, administered by Bombay High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradhe. Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant and several dignitaries were present. Addressing the gathering, Ashok Gajapathi Raju said that he would uphold the Constitution while serving the people of Goa. Chief Minister Nara Chandrababu Naidu congratulated the newly appointed Goa Governor and expressed hope that he would set a high standard in his new role through impartial and dedicated service. AP Legislative Assembly Speaker Ch Ayyanna Patrudu, Union Civil Aviation Minister K Ram Mohan Naidu, and HRD and IT Minister Nara Lokesh also attended the ceremony and congratulated the Goa Governor. Later, they met Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant and felicitated him. BJP leaders from Andhra Pradesh, including State President PVN Madhav and Union Minister of State for Heavy Industries Bhupathiraju Srinivasa Varma, also attended the swearing-in and met the Goa Chief Minister. Ashok Gajapathi Raju, who was affiliated with the Telugu Desam Party, resigned from the party following the announcement of his gubernatorial appointment.
Indian Express
16 hours ago
- Indian Express
The end of an error
The Bombay High Court acquitted all 12 accused in the 7/11 Mumbai train blasts case from 2006, when bombs ripped through the Western Suburban Railway, killing 189 people and injuring 800 others. A special bench of Justices Anil S Kilor and Shyam C Chandak observed that the prosecution 'utterly failed' to prove their case. Their convictions were quashed and set aside. More embarrassingly for the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad, the court was scathing about the lapses in the investigation, noting, 'Creating a false appearance of having solved a case by presenting that the accused have been brought to justice gives a misleading sense of resolution.' To put a time frame in perspective, one of the falsely accused in the Mumbai train blasts case was arrested when his daughter was six months old. He's been released when she's in college. Meanwhile, the actual perpetrators of this terrorist act roam free. The families of the victims must endure the frustration of being denied closure, yet again. This was a high-profile case with intense media scrutiny and public pressure. One naively believes the authorities would leave nothing to chance while zeroing in on the culprits. Which is what makes it so much more frightening that despite all that focussed attention, the wrong people were incarcerated. It sends shivers down one's spine to think how justice is arrived at in less important matters in India — and how many people may be languishing in jails for crimes they didn't commit. Some situations are too tragic to fully comprehend, but it's clear these men have been through a surreal, never-ending nightmare that's harder to process, because it's the state that's inflicted the damage. Their free-falling ordeal is eerily reminiscent of Franz Kafka's 1925 masterpiece The Trial, where a man stands accused of a crime he can't recollect and whose nature is never revealed to him. Unlike Kafka's ill-fated protagonist who's executed in an abandoned quarry, these men have survived, but it's not like life is going to be all peaches and cream going forward. Much like the terrorising bureaucracy in The Trial that wields absolute power over the condemned individual, these exonerated men have been dehumanised. Being marked in public memory means they'll be tested, over and over again. Labels like 'terrorist' are tough to shake off. Resurrecting an identity and career, catching up on the changes in the world in two decades, presents considerable challenges. Criminal justice failures capture our imaginations because they speak so profoundly to the human condition, to fundamental questions about punishment, ambition and ethics. Throughout history, in mythology and in reality, there have been people who couldn't get a fair trial. Think of Joseph in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New. Believers make sense of a bad hand by dividing the Universe into halves of heaven and hell. Contemplating karmic retribution and ancient Biblical proverbs, that declare a day of Judgment when an all-knowing God will prevail, is one way of finding solace in a confusingly unjust world. Then there are those who imagine the Universe has a third layer, earth, that contains elements of both, beauty and terror. Injustice is a recurring theme in philosophical inquiry and art-form. The beautifully executed The Shawshank Redemption (1994) explores what it takes to keep hope alive when faced with a murder rap. The iconic line, Get busy living or get busy dying reflects stoicism; when life is spiralling out of control, all we can do is control our reaction to it. There are no satisfying answers to why so many innocent people are tossed around by twists in destiny. It's a sobering thought that everybody's more vulnerable when a morally bankrupt government is in charge. The writer is director, Hutkay Films
