Alleging that there is “malice in fact” in the case filed against him, MLA Nitesh Rane has said that the complainant (Santosh Parab) was apparently felicitated by high placed political personalities for his “outstanding sacrifice and courage" to withstand the pressure of political leaders in Sindhudurg and having named Rane in the FIR.
Nitesh, son of Union minister Narayan Rane who represents the Kankavali Assembly seat in Sindhudurg district, had approached the HC seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with an attack on one Santosh Parab. He had approached the HC after the sessions court at Sindhudurg rejected his plea in December 2021.
During the hearing on Wednesday, special public prosecutor Sudeep Pasbola informed the HC that they would not arrest Nitesh till the court passes final order on his pre-arrest bail plea.
In his additional affidavit before the HC, Nitesh Rane has said that there is malice in the investigation “for ulterior political motives and the outcome of some lampooning outside Vidhan Bhavan on December 23, 2021”.
His counsel Niteen Pradhan argued the FIR was outcome of the “lampooning” incident outside the Vidhan Bhavan in December. “The lampooning incident hurt the ruling political party so much that they filed the FIR,” argued Pradhan.
Besides, Nitesh has said in the additional affidavit that the state government’s affidavit does not reply to his contention that Shiv Sena activist Satish Sawant had met the complainant in the hospital at Kankavali which is run by the government. At the time, media was already present outside the hospital and the witness had made a statement against Nitesh and the co-accused even before the FIR was recorded later in the evening.
Statements of these journalists should be taken to rule out any false implication of Nitesh, said Pradhan.
Nitesh has also questioned as to why the government’s reply was silent on why no action was taken against him or why was he not called for interrogation between December 18 and 24 when his name was already disclosed.
His application before the HC says on December 18, 2021, four persons were arrested by Kankavali police and another, fifth man, arrested on December 20. All five were on December 25 remanded to custody till January 6, 2022. His plea states that “In the remand order, it has been observed that the medical certificate of the complainant shows that the injury is simple in nature.” This falsifies the complainant’s allegations of “being dragged” which “is an afterthought”.
ALSO READFPJ Legal: 'Helpless and incompetent', Karnataka HC questions state govt over Congress’s Mekedatu...
(To receive our E-paper on whatsapp daily, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)