HC denies bail to accused in Baba Siddique murder case

Baba Siddique, 66, was shot dead at around 9.30pm on October 12, 2024, as he stepped out of his son Zeeshan Siddique’s office after meeting party workers ahead of the assembly elections

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has denied bail to Chetan Dilip Paradhi, an accused in the murder of former minister and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Ziauddin Abdul Rahim, also known as Baba Siddique, observing that there was prima facie evidence against him which showed his involvement in the alleged conspiracy and revealed his membership in the organised crime syndicate.

Baba Siddique (Hindustan Times)

Relying on the embargo under section 21(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), which bars courts from granting bail to accused unless they’re satisfied that the accused are prima facie not guilty and unlikely to commit any offence when released on bail, a single judge bench of justice RM Joshi on Thursday said the criminal antecedent against Paradhi rendered the court to reject his bail application.

Siddique, 66, was shot dead at around 9.30pm on October 12, 2024, as he stepped out of his son Zeeshan Siddique’s office after meeting party workers ahead of the assembly elections. Police later identified the shooters as Gurmel Baljit Singh and Shivkumar Gautam, allegedly linked to the gang led by incarcerated gangster Lawrence Bishnoi. So far, 26 accused have been arrested in the case, while three accused are absconding.

Paradhi, a 30 year-old photographer, was arrested for alleged murder, criminal conspiracy and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Arms Act, the Maharashtra Police Act, and the MCOCA.

In his plea before the high court, Paradhi claimed that there was no sufficient evidence of his involvement in the killing and the prosecution was merely relying on call detail records (CDRs), which showed he was in touch with several co-accused who were already known to him socially. This, he said, could not be treated as incriminating evidence.

Additional public prosecutor Arfan Sait opposed Paradhi’s bail, saying the confessional statements of the co-accused, along with witness statements and CDRs, showed his involvement in the crime.

Baba Siddique’s widow Shehzeen Siddique appeared as an intervener in the matter. Senior advocate Abad Ponda and advocate Anas Shaikh, representing Shehzeen, contended that the confessional statement of the co-accused clearly indicated that Paradhi had knowledge of the crime.

“It is a substantive piece of evidence and it is not open for this court to discard the same during trial or even at this stage,” the advocates said.

The court held that the “overall evidence collected during the course of the investigation prima facie shows the conspiracy being hatched in order to eliminate the deceased”. The abettor of the crime was entitled to similar punishment as the person who actually committed the crime and such punishment could extend to life imprisonment, the court said. Confessional statements of the co-accused were admissible as evidence that would not only bind the person making the statement but also become evidence against the co-accused, it noted.

Considering the prima facie evidence against Paradhi and his criminal antecedent, the court said, “We find no reason to record any satisfaction with regard to the embargo created by section 21(4) of the MCOCA. In absence of compliance of these conditions, no bail could be granted to the applicant.”