The Bombay High Court reserved its order on a plea by Uddhav Sena leader Akhil Chitre seeking to quash the FIR in the 2020 lawyer assault case, where the court remarked, “No business entering court to assault advocates.”
The Bombay High Court reserved its order regarding a plea from Akhil Chitre, a leader of Shiv Sena (UBT) and former member of Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), who is seeking to have an FIR against him quashed.
This FIR was registered in 2020 for allegedly assaulting a lawyer on court premises.
During the proceedings, the bench made strong observations, stating,
“You had no business to enter the court premises to assault advocates.”
The case stems from a time when MNS was in conflict with Amazon over the absence of Marathi as a language option on its platform in Maharashtra.
As per the prosecution, in October 2020, Chitre and other MNS members allegedly threatened Amazon Transportation Services. In retaliation, Amazon filed a civil suit in the Dindoshi City Civil Court to prevent Chitre and his associates from entering its premises.
This suit, represented by advocates Sushant Joshi and Akshay Purkar, resulted in an ex parte order in favor of Amazon.
Earlier, On December 4, 2020, when Joshi was unwell, advocate Durgesh Gupta represented Amazon.
After the hearing was adjourned and Gupta left the courtroom, he was reportedly approached by unidentified individuals. Before two individuals allegedly attacked and threatened him, One of them inquired about his name and then asked,
“You brought this stay, have you sent this notice to Raj Thackeray Saheb?”
As other lawyers gathered to the scene, the assailants fled. Chitre was seen nearby, trying to move his parked car but was stopped by the lawyers. The individual who initially questioned Gupta was also spotted in the vicinity.
A case was subsequently registered at Dindoshi police station under various IPC sections, including 341 (wrongful restraint), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 34 (common intention).
Additional Public Prosecutor Anil Chate informed the court on Friday that the investigation is complete, with two assailants identified and CCTV footage confirming Chitre’s presence at the scene. He added that the chargesheet is ready for submission.
Defending Chitre, advocate Tapan Thatte noted that the court had previously instructed the prosecution not to file a chargesheet against his client. He argued that Chitre was not named as one of the attackers and was merely in his car at the time of the incident.
The court reviewed statements from other advocates and medical reports related to the case.
While reserving its order, the bench commented,
“We will be happy to pass an order in a case where an advocate is assaulted by a third person, that too a politician, in presence of other advocates.”