8 Jan 2024 11:07 AM GMT
The Supreme Court on Monday (January 8) dismissed a plea challenging the discontinuation of the court-monitored probe into the 2013 murder of anti-superstition crusader Narendra Dabholkar.
The Division Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma however left it open for petitioner-Mukta Dabholkar (daughter of Narendra Dabholkar) to provide any material related to the criminal cases in question to the CBI, which the CBI "shall take into consideration and proceed in accordance with law".
Passing the order, the court said,
"Prima facie, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the High Court. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, we leave it open for the petitioner to provide any such material which may come handy to the petitioner and may be related to the criminal cases in question. Same be provided to CBI, which shall take into consideration and proceed in accordance with law."
It was observed that the Bombay High Court order, declining to continue monitoring of the probe, was reasonable and monitoring could not be at the pleasure of a party. "Courts are not meant for monitoring and everything...", remarked the Bench orally.
During hearing, Senior Advocate Anand Grover, appearing for the petitioner, urged that the present case was a serious one requiring the larger conspiracy to be investigated, "because otherwise you are only left with the persons who are shooting at the end of the day, not the mastermind behind the whole thing".
On this, the court enquired if the petitioner knew who was the mastermind. The answer was given in the negative. It was contended that the CBI shall investigate the same. Accordingly, the Bench passed its order.
Notably, the murder probe had been transferred by the High Court of Bombay in 2014 from Pune police to CBI, following a petition by activist Ketan Tirodkar and later by Dabholkar's daughter Mukta Dabholkar. Since then, the progress of the case was being monitored by the High Court.
In April last year, the High Court refused to continue monitoring the probe, observing that monitoring could not be perpetual. "While some monitoring is fine, law is clear that when a charge sheet is filed, the rights of the accused are to be considered," the court had said.
Aggrieved by the same, Mukta Dabholkar had moved the Supreme Court, relying on CBI's statement that the investigation in the case was continuing. On previous hearing, Senior Advocate Anand Grover had drawn the Supreme Court's attention to CBI's statement that investigation was in progress in respect of two absconding accused and others involved in the "large spread conspiracy". It was also highlighted that the CBI headquarters had not taken any decision on the report submitted by the Investigating Officer, and 4 weeks' time had been requested by CBI from the High Court to reach a final conclusion.
Case Title: Mukta Dabholkar and Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., SLP(Crl) No. 6539/2023