Gangster-turned-politician Atiq Ahmed and members of his family have repeatedly sought protection from courts saying they face threats and their lives are in danger.
Indeed, a month before his son Asad Ahmed and his aide were killed in an encounter by the Uttar Pradesh police Thursday, Atiq Ahmed had knocked on the doors of the Supreme Court for his protection in custody in the Umesh Pal murder case.
On March 17, Atiq Ahmed’s lawyer, who had asked for an urgent hearing, sought more time to argue because, he said, he needed to file some crucial documents and photographs concerning his case.
A bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela Trivedi heard the case.
The judges chided Ahmed’s lawyer that the files concerning the case were sent to the judge’s offices “close to midnight in a truck.” The bench asked why they were “burdened” when there was no urgency.
The case was listed again on March 28, when the Court refused to grant relief and instead asked Ahmed to approach the High Court.
Ahmed had argued that he faced threats to his life and that he had been issued threats. “The state machinery will take care of you,” the apex court had said allowing Ahmed’s lawyer to withdraw the plea.
The same day, a Prayagraj court convicted Ahmed and two other accused in the 2006 kidnapping of Umesh Pal, the prime witness in the BSP MLA Raju Pal murder case. Umesh Pal was killed on February 24 this year and Atiq’s son Asad was one of the accused in that case.
The MP-MLA court in Prayag sentenced Atiq Ahmed along with two other accused, Dinesh Pasi and Khan Saulat Hanif, to life imprisonment while directing each of them to pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation to the deceased Umesh Pal’s family.
This proved to be the first conviction for the jailed gangster.
Incidentally, a day after Umesh Pal’s killing, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath had declared in the Assembly that ‘is mafia ko mitti me mila denge’. Atiq and Khalid Ashraf, who were named in the murder case, are lodged in Sabarmati Central jail and Bareilly jail, respectively.
On February 27, Atiq and Ashraf had filed separate petitions in a local court in Prayagraj alleging threat to their lives while being brought to court.
In his petition, Atiq had stated that police are planning to eliminate him while being brought to Prayagraj by road after obtaining his production warrant. Echoing this, Ashraf alleged that the police would get him killed in a planned manner after taking him to Prayagraj by road.
On February 28, the court rejected these pleas after the prosecution said that there was no application seeking their warrant pending in court.
Atiq’s wife Shaista Parveen and Ashraf’s wife Zainab Fatima had also written separate letters to the Chief Minister and Chief Secretary respectively requesting to arrange security for their husbands. They claimed that there is a serious political conspiracy to kill their husband. Atiq and Ashraf’s lawyer Vijay Mishra did not respond to calls.
Coincidentally, on February 27, 2023, refusing bail to Atiq’s other son Ali Ahmad, the Allahabad High Court had made remarks on criminal antecedents of Ahmed’s family.
“Mafia Don and his family have accumulated the wealth and properties of the several hundred crores in this fashion from proceeds of crime. The accused applicant is Mafia Don himself in making, his role has figured in commission of the offense of murder of Umesh Pal, star witness in the murder case of Raju Pal, sitting Member of Legislative Assembly, which has been expedited by the Supreme Court. Such a criminal if comes out from jail on bail, would be a threat not only to the witnesses, but also constant threat to the society,” the court said.
However, on March 21, the Allahabad High Court asked the UP government to ensure the safety and proper security of Atiq’s brother, during his jail transfer for the purpose of interrogation or remand proceedings, concerning the Umesh Pal murder case.
“But as the law of the country demands, every citizen be given a fair trial and when there is an apprehension to the petitioner, in view of the recent developments, we grant this protection and directions are issued,” the court stated.
Near the site of the encounter in Jhansi on Thursday. Gajendra Yadav 
Share
