Stay on probe against Angre to remain | mumbai | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Dec 18, 2017-Monday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -
live
* Wins + Leads | Source : ECI/Media Reports

Stay on probe against Angre to remain

Observing that there was no change in circumstances, the Bombay High Court refused to vacate the stay on the probe in a 2005 atrocities case against encounter specialist Ravindra Angre, reports Urvi Mahajani.

mumbai Updated: Nov 04, 2009 01:13 IST
Urvi Mahajani

Observing that there was no change in circumstances, the Bombay High Court refused to vacate the stay on the probe in a 2005 atrocities case against encounter specialist Ravindra Angre.

Justice D.G. Karnik on Tuesday observed that the earlier high court judge had stayed the probe after hearing both the parties and since then there was no change in the circumstances that required him to interfere.

In September 2005, Thane civic engineer Sunil Jadhav registered a case against Angre. Jadhav alleged that Angre had stopped him when he was riding a bike with friend Harish Bhoir, abused him on his

caste and threatened with his pistol.

But the complaint was lodged with the Naupada police station under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, after eight days.

But the complaint was lodged with the Naupada police station under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, after eight days.

The probe was transferred to the CID on October 6, 2005.

After a week, a metropolitan magistrate granted Angre’s anticipatory bail and observed that no case under the Act was made out as the witness [Bhoir] had written to the police commissioner saying no such incident had taken place.

In February 2006, Angre approached the high court seeking to quash the FIR and in September 2007, the high court stayed the proceedings against Angre.

In July 2009, the CID approached the high court and sought to remove the stay so that it can investigate the matter.

Nangre argued that the CID cannot investigate further as the time has lapsed as contemplated under the Act.