MUMBAI: A special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court on Monday discharged a photo studio owner accused of tipping off shooters in the December 2023 killing of gangster Sumit Yerunkar, holding that there was “no sufficient ground for proceeding further”.
Yerunkar was killed on December 24, 2023, at about 3:10 pm, when he and his associates had gone to Shree Photo Studio at Azad Galli, Chunabhatti. According to the prosecution, five accused persons arrived there and opened fire on Yerunkar and his colleagues, following which Yerunkar “suffered multiple gunshot injuries and died in the hospital”.
The police said the accused were Yerunkar’s former associates, Sunil Patil also known as Sunny, Sagar Sawant, Narendra also known as Nanya Patil and Ashutosh, known as Babu Devidas Gavand. The alleged accused had earlier worked under Yerunkar before he was jailed in 2016. According to the police they fired 21 rounds, killing Yerunkar and injuring three of his associates as well as an eight-year-old girl playing nearby. After the FIR, offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including murder, provisions of the Arms Act, the Maharashtra Police Act and later sections of MCOCA were invoked.
The only allegation against the photo studio owner, Vishal Krishna Utekar, was that he had informed the co-accused Prabhakar Niwas Pachimbre that Yerunkar was coming there, enabling the attack.
However, during the hearing on the discharge application, special judge NR Pradhan recorded that the police admitted they had not collected the call detail records (CDRs) of Utekar’s mobile phone “to show that he informed other accused that the deceased was coming to his photo studio”. The judge further noted that they had “not recorded the confessional statement of Prabhakar Niwas Pachimbre to show that during his custodial interrogation, he informed them that the applicant had given information to him”.
The order also recorded that the officers were “unable to show prima facie material against the applicant… though they were present at the time of final argument of discharge application”.
In addition, the court observed that there were no other crimes registered against Utekar to prove that he had engaged in “unlawful activities along with the accused” to make money, a requirement for him to be booked under the MCOCA. The court also noted that Utekar was not mentioned in the earlier MCOCA order as an accused and in an earlier panchanama, he was shown as a witness before later being called to the court as an accused.
“Considering all the above aspects, I conclude that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding further against the applicant (Utekar). Hence, he shall be discharged,” the judge held, allowing the application and discharging Utekar of all offences invoked in the case.