INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
MUMBAI: Twenty-six years after the murder of firebrand trade union leader Datta Samant, a special CBI court on Friday acquitted deported
gangster Chhota Rajan, accused of masterminding the assassination."Upon scrutinising testimony of the witnesses, it is seen that nothing has
come on record to prove Chhota Rajan hatched the conspiracy and prepared a plan for the murder of Dr Datta Samant," said special judge AM
Patil.Samant was killed near his Powai home on January 16, 1997, while going to his office in his vehicle
His driver, an eyewitness, escaped with injuries
Twenty-two witnesses deposed in the trial against Rajan, 63, and eight others turned hostile.In a 21-page judgment, the judge said suspicion
cannot take the place of legal proof and the prosecution put "no incriminating circumstance on record against the accused".The trial against
Rajan and six others were separated as they had been absconding
In 2000, the sessions court had sentenced sharpshooters Ganpat Bamane, Vijay Thopate and Arun Londhe to life in jail
In 2010, the Bombay HC upheld the order
Police said the murder was the fallout of a trade union rivalry over the lockout at the Premier Auto Limited (PAL) factories.Represented by
advocate Sudeep Pasbola and appearing via video conferencing from Delhi's Tihar jail, Rajan had denied the allegations
He said he was in Dubai from 1986 to 1993, and due to reasons not known to him, false cases were slapped on him
"This was also a false case," said Rajan.The defence also argued that in the previous trial, the offence of criminal conspiracy had not been
proved.Rajan is serving a life sentence in the 2011 murder of journalist J Dey
It was among the 71 cases that were transferred to the CBI after the gangster was deported from Bali in 2015.On Friday, the judge did not
accept a plea to initiate perjury proceedings against a woman for turning hostile
The prosecution argued she is liable as she had deposed during the first trial on February 11, 2000, but now she denied doing it.The judge
pointed out the police had not recorded her statement under Section 161 of CrPC and she had turned hostile in the first trial
"Perjury must appear to be deliberate
In the present case, in the absence of any earlier statement as to the fact, the action under section 340 CrPC is not needed," said the
judge.The prosecution's case was that on that January morning, a cyclist blocked the road near his Powai home as Samant's Tata Sumo was
Five assailants surrounded the car and opened fired
Samant was taken to a nursing home owned by his son, Dr Prashant Samant, where he was declared dead on arrival
Samant's driver and Prashant deposed as a prosecution witnesses.Another witness told the court he was out buying a file when at he saw the
two injured and informed Samant's other son Bhushan
He saw a person running from there and identified him during the identification parade.Another witness, a hardware shop salesperson, had
stepped out on hearing the shots
He saw 4-5 persons board an autorickshaw and go towards Gandhinagar
He identified the three convicted accused in the identification parade as well as the trial.
