Baba Siddique murder: Bombay HC asks why his widow’s statement wasn’t recorded, seeks response to her SIT probe plea

Siddique, a former state minister and MLA, was shot dead by three assailants outside his son and then MLA Zeeshan’s office in Bandra (East) on October 12 last year.

A division bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Ranjitsinha R Bhonsale was hearing Shehzeen Siddique’s plea, which alleged that the police had “failed to collect the incriminating material against the builder lobby from the petitioner, her family and other persons who have remained present or who are the party to the meetings of the deceased Baba Siddique with the builder lobby and other concerned material”.

Shehzeen’s plea also alleged that the investigation stopped at Anmol Bishnoi (brother of gangster Lawrence Bishnoi) without investigating the real culprits. She claimed to have crucial WhatsApp messages and recordings that the police ignored to shield the culprits. The plea claimed that the evidence pointed to builders involved in redeveloping slum areas in Baba Siddique’s former constituency and that her husband, who “safeguarded slum-dwellers’ interests” was a big hurdle in the way of the main builders interested in developing the slum area.

‘Suspects have political links’

This angle, she claimed, was not examined owing to the suspects’ political links with Maharashtra’s ruling party. She seeks an investigation by an independent police force, citing a threat message Siddique received from developer Prithvijeet Rajaram Chavan in July last year.

The petition states that Zeeshan had named builders Mohit Kamboj, Prithvijeet Chavan, Ashok Mundra and Vijay Thakkar, among others, in his statement to the police. However, “no investigation whatsoever has been done from the said point of view”, it said.

Advocates Pradip Gharat and Trivankumar Karnani, appearing for Shehzeen, submitted that she was not satisfied with the investigation conducted by the Nirmal Nagar police in Bandra (East) as the main culprits and suspects were not investigated.

Gharat informed the court that after the petition was filed by Shehzeen, the security detail of Zeeshan (who was the target as mentioned in the chargesheet) and his family members was reduced from Y+ level to merely two constables, adding that this was a matter of concern.

The bench orally questioned the police whether they contacted Shehzeen after her 40-day grieving period and if any attempt was made to record her statement at a later stage.

Special Public Prosecutor Mahesh Mule, representing the police, submitted that while the investigation team tried to contact Shehzeen, it could only reach Zeeshan Siddique. While the police sought to obtain a statement from Shezeen on multiple occasions, Zeeshan would tell them to deal with him or his people, Mule further said, adding that he would tell the police that his mother was either unable to speak or not keeping well.

The court, however, questioned how it could believe the claim since there was no case diary entry or any statement by Zeeshan to that effect on record. The court thus sought the state’s affidavit in reply to Shehzeen’s plea.