Court acquits alleged Chhota Rajan Gang member in 1991 attempt to murder case

Mumbai court acquits Raju Chikana, 62, in a 1991 murder attempt case due to lack of evidence and failure of key witnesses to identify him.

Mumbai: A sessions court on Saturday acquitted 62-year-old Vilas Balaram Pawar, alias Raju Chikana, an alleged member of the Chhota Rajan gang, in an attempt to murder case dating back to 1991. Pawar, who had been absconding for 16 years, was rearrested last month and put on trial.

Court acquits alleged Chhota Rajan Gang member in 1991 attempt to murder case

Notorious gangster Chhota Rajan (Rajendra Sadashiv Nikalje) led a gang involved in extortion, murder, smuggling, and drug trafficking. Convicted in several cases, including the murder of a journalist, he is currently serving a life sentence in Tihar Jail, Delhi.

Raju Chikna’s acquittal relates to a 1991 incident where he and three other alleged gang members reportedly opened fire on Shaukat Ali Ahamadali outside his Govandi home. The attack was allegedly linked to an extortion dispute involving co-accused Ganeshsingh Thakur and the victim’s family. Ahamadali’s wife, Mariambi Shaikh, lodged a complaint, following which the injured victim was taken to Rajawadi Hospital, and a case was registered.

Pawar was initially arrested in October 1992, and a charge sheet was filed against him and three others in January 1993. However, after securing bail, he went absconding, leading to his case being separated from the others. On January 3, 2025, the Deonar police rearrested him, bringing him to trial.

During the proceedings, a crucial setback for the prosecution emerged when the victim, Ahamadali, failed to identify Pawar in court. The Sessions Court subsequently acquitted the accused.

“The evidence on record confirms the occurrence of the incident, but the involvement of the accused (Pawar) is not established by the prosecution,” noted Additional Sessions Judge R D Sawant in the ruling. The judge further observed that neither of the two key witnesses—Ahamadali and his wife, Shaikh —supported the prosecution’s claim regarding the accused’s identity.

In its detailed order issued on February 6, the court ruled that the prosecution had failed to present conclusive evidence linking Pawar to the crime. “The prosecution case may be true, but it has failed to bridge the gap between ‘may be true’ and ‘must be true’ concerning the identity and involvement of the accused,” the judgment stated.

As the prosecution could not establish Pawar’s identity as one of the shooters or prove his role in the attempted murder, the court acquitted him of all charges.

This verdict underscores the critical role of victim and eyewitness testimonies in criminal trials and highlights the prosecution’s burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.