Rai case bungled 8212; Cops

Additional Sessions Judge R B Malik had acquitted Mohammed Arif Din Mohammed Shaikh, a member of the Abu Salem gang, for want of evidence in the assault on Bollywood producer-director Rajiv Rai at his Tardeo office on July 31, 1997.

The assault on Rai was allegedly orchestrated by the Abu Salem gang after the director ignored the gangster8217;sdemand for Rs 20 crore. Following threats in June that year, an armed constable, Mohan Singh, of the Special Operations Squad, was deputed to provide Rai with security.

Singh, the prosecution witness, was present in Rai8217;s office, when the assailants 8212; Mohammed Arif Din Mohammed Shaikh, Shaikh Ismail Khan and Mohammed Iqbal Dastagir Shaikh 8212; walked into Rai8217;s second floor Tardeo office at AC Market and opened fire. Singh raised an alarm and then chased one of the accused down the staircase and across the road and fired at him.

However, according to Dukhande, several lapses by the police officials who investigated the case as well as the witnesses they fielded, had weakened the prosecution8217;s case. He points out: 8220;Singh, who was the prosecution8217;s only witness after Rai8217;s receptionist Dilip Dhavale turned hostile, could not explain why he did not fire at the fleeing accused on the staircase when there was no one present who may have been hurt. According to the investigating officers, the accused fired atrandom on the road outside AC Market. But the prosecution could not explain how not a single person was injured. Besides, no cartridges were found at the site.8221;

Also, he says, the court itself had expressed surprise when it learnt that the prime accused who was injured before being nabbed, was detained at Rai8217;s office for several hours without being administered any medical aid. Senior officers of the rank of additional commissioner of police and deputy commissioner of police were present at the time.

8220;The denial of medical aid to the injured accused cast a doubt on the authenticity of the investigation,8221; Dukhande observes. He says the court had observed that the police should have both administered medical aid besides interrogating him to secure the names of the other suspects.

There were problems with the panchnama as well, Dukhande adds. It did not include a record of any bloodstains when the doctor8217;s evidence shows that the accused was bleeding when he was examined that night. Further, hesays, the investigating officers had claimed that two revolvers were seized from the fourth floor of Rai8217;s office building while the incident took place on the second floor. The police could not explain the seizure on that particular floor and worse, did not even record the statements of the occupants of the offices situated there. No evidence whatsoever was collected by the investigating officer against the other two accused, he says.

8220;Every case is investigated well enough but if the judge does not believe this, it is in his right to do so,8221; Joint Commissioner of Police Crime, D Shivanandan, told Express Newsline. He says the police now plan to appeal in the Bombay High Court.

8220;This is not a fit case for appeal. It is a very weak case which is lacking in proper investigation,8221; says Dukhande, who adds that for him the case is as good as closed.