The Bombay High Court remarked that the case against Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) leader Raj Thackeray lacks evidence of any provocative speech or instigation, therefore dismissing the charge of him inciting violence as unfounded.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MAHARASHTRA: The Bombay High Court found the charges against Raj Thackeray, the leader of the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), baseless concerning allegations of inciting violence. The court’s scrutiny revealed a conspicuous absence of substantial evidence related to purported incendiary speech and provocation by Thackeray, leading to the conclusion that the accusations of instigation were unfounded.
This development unfolded as the Aurangabad bench of the High Court deliberated on Thackeray’s appeal against a previous decision by a lower court. This earlier judgment had dismissed his plea for discharge in a case that has lingered for over 16 years. The High Court pointed out that the lower court had overlooked crucial details and made an error in refusing Thackeray’s request for discharge.
Originating on October 21, 2008, the case involved alleged MNS affiliates accused of vandalizing a state transport bus in the then Osmanabad district. Supporters of MNS, reportedly advocating for Thackeray’s release from custody and lauding him through slogans, were implicated in these acts of stone-pelting.
The backdrop to these events was Thackeray’s contentious remarks in 2008, targeting migrant workers from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh for taking jobs in Maharashtra. Following these comments, cases were registered against him for purportedly inciting MNS members, leading to assaults on north Indian aspirants at a railway examination in Mumbai. Although Thackeray was shortly released, the demand for his liberation incited scattered episodes of violence across the state, one of which led to the charges in question.
Despite a chargesheet being filed, Thackeray, designated as accused number 6, sought dismissal of the charges, only for the trial court to decline his petition.
Advocates Rajendra Shirodkar and Sayaji Nangre, representing Thackeray, argued that their client was incarcerated and not present during the alleged incident. They highlighted the prosecution’s failure to formally record Thackeray’s alleged inflammatory speech or append it to the chargesheet, undermining claims of his incitement.
Justice Nitin Suryawanshi‘s bench observed not only the absence of the speech from records but also noted that none of the testimonies collected during the investigation indicated that witnesses had heard Thackeray’s speech motivating the co-accused to commit the offense.
Furthermore, the bench noted that similar cases against Thackeray had been previously dismissed by the prosecution under analogous circumstances. Consequently, the court overturned the lower court’s decision to reject Thackeray’s discharge request, deeming it-
“unsustainable in law and facts of the case.”
This judgment not only underscores the paramount importance of concrete evidence in legal proceedings but also highlights the intricacies involved in cases of alleged incitement and public disorder.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Raj Thackeray
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
