Mumbai, March 11, 2024 – Amarendra Mishra, a security guard, has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai in connection with the high-profile double murder case involving Maurice Naronha and Abhishek Ghosalkar. Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne rejected Mishra’s bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 400 of 2024), citing the ongoing investigation and the applicant’s potential role in the alleged conspiracy.

Mishra was arrested on February 9, 2024, in connection with Crime Register No. 12/2024, registered at DCB CID, Unit-XI, Mumbai. He faces charges under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 25, 29(b), and 30 of the Arms Act, and Sections 37(1)(A) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

Prosecution’s Case:

The prosecution alleges that on February 8, 2024, Maurice Naronha invited Abhishek Ghosalkar to his office in Dahisar (West), Mumbai. There was prior enmity between the two. During a Facebook Live session intended to demonstrate a resolution of their dispute, Naronha allegedly shot and killed Ghosalkar with a licensed gun registered in Mishra’s name. Naronha then immediately took his own life. The prosecution contends that Mishra was involved in a criminal conspiracy with Naronha to murder Ghosalkar, having provided the weapon used in the crime.

Defense Arguments:

Mishra’s advocate, Sandeep P. Dubey, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He stated that the incident was captured live on Facebook and clearly showed Naronha shooting Ghosalkar and then himself. Mishra, who worked as Naronha’s bodyguard, claimed that he kept his licensed gun in a locker provided by Naronha and was arrested solely because the weapon was registered in his name. He emphasized that the investigation was complete and that he was the sole breadwinner of his family.

Intervenor’s Objections:

Mrs. Tejasvee Abhishek Ghosalkar, the widow of the deceased Abhishek Ghosalkar, intervened in the case through her advocate, Dr. Bhushan V. Mahadik, and strongly opposed Mishra’s bail. She argued that the murder was premeditated and that Mishra, a recent resident of Mumbai originally from Uttar Pradesh, had conspired with Naronha.

Court’s Decision:

Judge Sasne, after reviewing the application, the prosecution’s and intervenor’s replies, and the written arguments, noted that Naronha had used Mishra’s gun to kill Ghosalkar. The court found substance in the prosecution’s contention that Mishra had provided access to the weapon, as it was kept in a locker to which he presumably had the key.

The court also highlighted that Mishra and Naronha had recently purchased bullets together and that Mishra, as Naronha’s bodyguard, was aware of the meeting with Ghosalkar. The court emphasized the prior enmity between Naronha and Ghosalkar, and concluded that these circumstances warranted further investigation into Mishra’s potential role in the alleged conspiracy.

Judge Sasne stated that releasing Mishra at this stage would pose a threat to prosecution witnesses and risk the tampering of evidence. He also noted that Mishra was not a permanent resident of Mumbai and could potentially flee. Given the preliminary stage of the murder investigation and the ongoing probe into the alleged conspiracy, the court concluded that Mishra was not entitled to bail.

Conclusion:

The court rejected Mishra’s bail application, emphasizing the need for a thorough investigation into his potential involvement in the conspiracy to murder Abhishek Ghosalkar.