Baba Siddique murder case: Court pulls up ACP for failure to take Anmol Bishnoi’s custody

MUMBAI: A special MCOCA court on Wednesday issued a show-cause notice to assistant commissioner of police (ACP) and investigating officer Subhash Dhudhgaonkar for “deliberately disregarding” the court’s directions to secure the presence of absconding accused Anmol Bishnoi in the Baba Siddique murder case

MUMBAI: A special MCOCA court on Wednesday issued a show-cause notice to assistant commissioner of police (ACP) and investigating officer Subhash Dhudhgaonkar for “deliberately disregarding” the court’s directions to secure the presence of absconding accused Anmol Bishnoi in the Baba Siddique murder case.

The order came on an application filed by the slain NCP leader’s widow, Shehzeen Siddique, through advocates Trivankumar Karnani and Pradip Gharat, who alleged that the Crime Branch had filed an “evasive, dishonest and misleading” compliance report instead of following the court’s directions.

Special Judge Satyanarayan Navander directed Dhudhgaonkar to explain by August 12 why appropriate action should not be initiated against him for alleged wilful disobedience of the court’s July 10 order.

Bishnoi is a wanted accused in the murder, where Siddique was shot dead on a busy street outside his son Zeeshan’s office in Bandra east on October 12, 2024. Police allege the murder ordered by Anmol’s incarcerated brother Lawrence Bishnoi’s gang.

The show-cause notice was issued on Shehzeen’s latest application challenging the Crime Branch’s compliance report filed pursuant to the court’s July 10 directions. Those directions had been passed on an earlier plea moved by Shehzeen after she complained that, despite Bishnoi being lodged in Delhi’s Tihar Jail in connection with an NIA case, the Mumbai Crime Branch had taken no meaningful steps to secure his presence before the trial court.

When questioned by the court, Dhudhgaonkar submitted that unless Bishnoi’s physical custody was obtained, proper investigation could not be carried out and, therefore, the option of producing him through video conferencing was not pursued.

Rejecting the explanation, the court observed that it had considered the restraint order and had specifically suggested legally permissible alternatives. Instead, the investigating officer merely repeated an exercise that was “bound to fail” and made no genuine effort to implement the court’s directions.

Shehzeen contended that the investigating agency ought to have sought Bishnoi’s production through video conferencing, enabling the MCOCA court to authorise his detention in the present case and ensure his regular production.

The court has directed Dhudhgaonkar to file a written explanation on or before August 12.