In a significant ruling that underscores the critical importance of robust investigative procedures, an Additional Sessions Court in Colva has acquitted five men accused of a murder, citing serious and glaring deficiencies in the police probe. The court's decision highlights a failure to establish basic legal requirements, including the identity of the accused and the link between alleged weapons and the crime.
Court Exposes Flaws in Murder Investigation
Additional Sessions Judge Pooja Kavlekar delivered the verdict, pointing out multiple shortcomings that led to the collapse of the prosecution's case. The judge emphasized that the investigation was marred by a failure to prove the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Furthermore, investigators did not collect crucial circumstantial evidence that could have substantiated the charges. Perhaps most damning was the court's observation that the prosecution could not establish a clear link between the recovered weapons and the crime itself.
The Fatal Altercation and Alleged Revenge Plot
The case originated from a violent incident rooted in a personal altercation. According to the prosecution, the events unfolded after a quarrel near the Margao railway station between a history-sheeter named Shaikh Anwar and another individual, Jagesh Meti. During this confrontation, Anwar allegedly splashed beer on Meti's face.
The prosecution's narrative claimed that an enraged Jagesh Meti then rushed to his residence at Moti Dongor and sought assistance from four other men: Nagraj Naikar, Sadashiv Meti, Basuraj Meti, and Manjunath Meti. The group allegedly conspired to seek revenge for the earlier insult.
Police accounts stated that later that same evening, the accused men intercepted Shaikh Anwar when he arrived at Moti Dongor. They then allegedly assaulted him using deadly weapons, an attack that resulted in Anwar's death.
Verdict Underscores Need for Investigative Rigor
The acquittal of all five accused—Jagesh Meti, Nagraj Naikar, Sadashiv Meti, Basuraj Meti, and Manjunath Meti—serves as a stark reminder of the legal standards required for a conviction. The court's detailed critique suggests that the investigation was unable to transform the initial allegations and claims into legally admissible and proven facts.
This case joins a growing list where courts have had to intervene due to lapses in police investigation, leading to the accused walking free. It raises pertinent questions about procedural diligence, evidence collection, and the ultimate pursuit of justice, leaving the victim's family without legal closure and the community questioning the efficacy of the system.
