Bail for Pansare murder accused

The Asian Age.  | Kalpesh Mhamunkar

Metros, Mumbai

The court asked him to furnish Rs 25,000 surety and was ordered not to leave Maharashtra.

Gaikwad’s advocate, Virendra Ichalkaranjikar said: “There were discrepancies in the accounts of two eyewitnesses - Atharva Shinde and Uma Pansare, the victim’s wife. In her statement, Mrs. Pansare told SIT that Sarang Akolkar and Vinay Pawar were the assailants, but Shinde’s statement identifies Gaikwad as the assailant,” he said.

Mumbai: Sameer Gaikwad, accused in the murder of comrade Govind Pansare, was granted bail by the Kolhapur district court on Saturday. The court asked him to furnish Rs 25,000 surety and was ordered not to leave Maharashtra. This was the fourth bail application from the Kolhapur court.  

However, the prosecution said it was not satisfied with the order. Prosecution lawyer Shivaji Rane told mediapersons, “Once we receive a copy of the order, we will challenge it in High Court.”

While granting the bail, District Judge L.D. Bile directed that Gaikwad would have to be present before SIT on every Sunday between 11 am to 2 pm and cannot leave the state. He has also been ordered to stay out of the Kolhapur district and warned against tampering with evidence.

Gaikwad’s advocate, Virendra Ichalkaranjikar said: “There were discrepancies in the accounts of two eyewitnesses - Atharva Shinde and Uma Pansare, the victim’s wife. In her statement, Mrs. Pansare told SIT that Sarang Akolkar and Vinay Pawar were the assailants, but Shinde’s statement identifies Gaikwad as the assailant,” he said.

“Mrs Pansare didn’t recognize Gaikwad in the identification parade. According to Shinde, one person had fired on Pansare, but according to SIT, two people had fired on him, which means two pistols were used. Experts were appointed to recreate the crime scene and that report says one person atop a bike and another in standing position had fired cartridges on Pansare. This means Shinde is lying,” he claimed.

“Another witness, Jyoti Kamble, made an extra judicial confession and it is not reliable according to the evidence act. It is not clear from Kamble and Gaikwad’s conversation that they were taking about Pansare’s killing,” he said.

“The prosecution produced a report from the Ahmedabad forensic laboratory, which was read in the court by the prosecutor, saying that weapons used in the Dabholkar-Pansare-Kalburgi case are different,” said Mr Ichalkaranjikar.

Read more...