Defence's Approach In Trying To Justify Narendra Dabholkar's Murder By Labelling Him As Anti-Hindu Is Condemnable: Pune Court

The Sessions Court, Pune, in its judgment convicting two accused and acquitting three for the murder of anti-superstition crusader Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, condemned the defence for trying to tarnish Dabholkar's image and justify his killing.

“An attempt is made to tarnish image of the deceased. At the same time, the approach of the defence was to justify the killing of the deceased Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, by labelling him as anti Hindu...The said approach is very strange and is condemnable”, the court said.

Additional Sessions Judge PP Jadhav noted that witness testimonies and arguments from the defence indicated hatred and bitter enmity harboured by right-wing organizations such as Sanatan Sanstha, Hindu Janjagruti Samiti, and allied Hindu groups against Dr Dabholkar. It was admitted by the accused that they were connected to Sanatan Sanstha, the court noted.

The court observed that despite the passage of more than five years since Dr. Narendra Dabholkar's assassination, the defence presented a magazine published in November-December 2018, which contained irrelevant and defamatory suggestions regarding the deceased and his associates. This magazine was used by the defence to portray activists, particularly Dr. Dabholkar, as being against the Hindu religion, the court said.

The court stated that the assassination of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar was an attempt to suppress his ideology. "Present case is very serious and is of national importance. Not only, Dr. Narendra Dabholkar is assassinated but an attempt is made to finish his ideology", the court remarked.

The court also criticized the authorities for procedural lapses for the issuance of sanction orders for prosecution of the accused under UAPA. Rule 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) (Recommendation and Sanction of Prosecution) Rules, 2008, stipulates that the competent authority must submit its recommendation for sanction to the Central or State Government within seven working days of receiving evidence gathered by the investigating officer.

However, during cross-examination, it was revealed that Shirish Mohod, then Deputy secretary and Sanjay Prasad, then Additional Chief Secretary of the Home Department failed to ensure timely processing and personal scrutiny of the proposals to prosecute. The court held that the sanction to prosecute the accused under UAPA was invalid.

“Considering the status of deceased this case is of national importance. Despite the said fact, casual and negligent approach of PW15 (Mohod) and PW19 (Prasad), is not only shocking but requires condemnation. It shows that even through this case is of national importance, officers on high posts PW15 and PW19 have not shown utmost care and caution expected from them.”

The court noted the absence of personal enmity of Sachin Andure and Sharad Kalaskar with Dr. Dabholkar but pointed out the existence of a well-prepared plan executed by them. It raised questions about the role of masterminds behind the crime and criticized the failure of investigative agencies to uncover their identities.

“Considering the economical and social status of the accused Nos. 2 (Andure) and 3 (Kalaskar), they are not the master minds of the crime. The main master mind behind the crime is someone else. Pune police as well as CBI has failed to unearth those master minds. They have to introspect whether it is their failure or deliberate inaction on their part due to influence by any person in powers”, the court observed.

Further, the court said that there is a need for a comprehensive investigation into the confessional statements recorded under the Karnataka Control of Organised Crime Act (KCOC), which were not proved before the court.

Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, who worked against superstitions through his organisation Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti, was shot dead by two bike-borne men while on a morning walk in Pune on August 20, 2013.

The CBI, which took over the investigation in 2014, identified Andure and Kalaskar as the perpetrators behind the crime. The prosecution argued that Dabholkar's murder was part of a conspiracy to silence voices challenging superstition and promoting rationalism.

Tawade, Andure, Kalaskar, and Bhave were charged under Sections 302 read with Section 120B of the IPC for criminal conspiracy and execution of the murder, section 16 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) as well as charges under the provisions of the Arms Act.

Accused Sanjeev Punalekar, a lawyer based in Mumbai, was charged under Section 201 of the IPC for allegedly causing the disappearance of evidence related to the case.

Sachin Andure and Sharad Kalaskar were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, 1860, and Section 3(25) of the Indian Arms Act. They were sentenced to life imprisonment and fined ₹5 lakh each.

Dr. Virendrasingh Tawade the alleged mastermind behind the murder, was acquitted along with Punalekar and Bhave, on the grounds of insufficient evidence. The court highlighted the lack of evidence linking Punalekar to the destruction of firearms used in the murder, as alleged.

Special Public Prosecutor PS Suryawanshi represented the State of Maharashtra.

Advocate Prakash Salshingikar represented Virendrasinh Tawde and Sachin Andure.

Advocate Suvarna Vast represented Sanjiv Punalekar.

Advocate Virendra Ichalkaranjikar represented Sharad Kalaskar and Vikram Bhave.

Case no. – Sessions Case No. 706/2016

Case Title – State of Maharashtra v. Virendrasinh Tawde and Ors.