Pune Gangland: Infamous Gangster Lakshman Jadhav Granted Bail by Bombay High Court
By India Crime Correspondent
PUNE, 24 January 2020
Bombay High Court, on a significant decision, granted bail to the infamous gangster Lakshman Jadhav (pictured) in connection with an attempt-to-murder case that was registered with Kothrud police back in June 2012.
The charge against Jadhav involved firing at the residence of city-based developer Sheshram Nenaji Chaudhari with the intent of extortion.
A prominent member of a gang originally led by Rahul Kandhare, Jadhav took the reins after Kandhare’s demise, resorting to targeting builders and entrepreneurs to extract funds.
Jadhav’s Elaborate Strategy
Jadhav’s modus operandi consisted of intimidation followed by extortion calls to his selected targets. His criminal trajectory included targeting the Pruthvi restaurant on Karve Road in December 2012.
Crime branch officials managed to locate and apprehend him in Yerwada Central Jail in August 2014, where he was operating under the alias of vehicle thief Santosh Kalshetti, an identity he had assumed to evade law enforcement.
Chronicle of Events
Following Jadhav’s entry into the jail in early August 2014, authorities identified him on August 11, 2014, marking the beginning of his confinement.
According to the filed complaint by Chaudhari, Jadhav had demanded money from him during May and June of 2012, which Chaudhari ignored.
On June 12, Vinayak Jade, an accountant working for Chaudhari, was attacked by four individuals, resulting in his survival. Subsequently, Jadhav continued pressuring Chaudhari for extortion funds.
An amount of Rs 49,000 was deposited by Jade into the account of Jadhav’s brother, Gokul, which was later withdrawn by the accused.
Formal Charges and Investigation
On September 27, Jadhav initiated a firing incident at Chaudhari’s residence.
Kothrud police registered charges against Jadhav under sections 307 (attempt to murder), 384 (extortion), 387 (threatening for extortion), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
The investigative process included the recovery of CCTV footage from the location, and it was noted that the threats persisted even after the filing of the FIR, as Chaudhari received continuous calls from varying phone numbers.
Legal Maneuvers and Acquittals
Jadhav’s pursuit of bail involved a journey through the sessions court, which ultimately rejected his plea. Unyielding, he escalated the matter to the Bombay High Court.
Defense counsel Satyavrat Joshi contended, “Jadhav has been incarcerated for the past five years, and no substantial evidence links him to the individual who contacted Chaudhari for extortion. Alleged calls were made from public phone booths, lacking definitive identification linking the person in the CCTV footage to Jadhav.”
Defense’s Standpoint and Prosecution’s Response
Joshi further underscored, “The accused has been acquitted in all 10 cases against him, spanning charges of attempt to murder, extortion, theft, and others. The sessions court even acquitted him in the case involving the shooting at Jade.”
In response, the prosecution countered, “Threatening calls directed at Chaudhari and Jade persisted post-FIR filing. Jadhav has an extensive criminal record, being involved in 11 cases, resulting in externment proceedings against him.”
High Court’s Verdict
Upon granting Jadhav bail, the High Court elucidated, “The complainant did not sustain significant injury. There lacks an identification parade linking the applicant to the individuals who fired at Chaudhari’s residence. Additionally, the applicant’s cell phone was not seized. Considering the quality of evidence, his detention cannot be upheld, especially since the trial has not commenced.”
………………………..
