Vikram Pawaskar, a prominent figure in the Maharashtra BJP, is accused of benefiting from what the petitioner describes as a sluggish "justice" process employed by the police.
Team Clarion
MUMBAI – A bench of the Bombay High Court has given two weeks to Maharashtra government prosecutor to respond to a writ petition seeking action against senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Vikram Pawaskar. The petition alleges Pawaskar’s involvement in the attack on a mosque in Satara in September, prompting the court to seek a response within the specified time frame.
The division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Manjusha Deshpande expressed concern over the lack of action by the police despite the registration of FIRs related to hate speeches.
The court order of January 19 specifically noted the petitioner’s claims regarding Pawaskar’s alleged role in instigating anti-Muslim violence. The court has called for a response from the public prosecutor by February 2, 2024, while also acknowledging the potential danger to the lives of the petitioner and witnesses. The bench instructed the public prosecutor to liaise with senior officials to ensure appropriate security measures are implemented.
The petitioner, distressed by the surge in hate crimes and the apparent lack of action against those responsible, has resorted to legal avenues. Despite filing multiple FIRs against individuals for delivering inflammatory speeches, the accused continue to evade justice. Pawaskar, a prominent figure in the Maharashtra BJP, is accused of benefiting from what the petitioner describes as a sluggish “justice” process employed by the police.
Notably, Pawaskar’s name was excluded from the final chargesheet filed on December 18, 2023, leading to the Bombay High Court directing Satara Police and Sangli Police to provide responses regarding his omission. The petitioner has also urged the court to consider transferring the investigation to a court-monitored special investigation team.
The writ petition underscores two hate speeches allegedly made by Pawaskar on January 24, 2023, and June 2, 2023, targeting the Muslim community. These speeches, as per the petitioner, incited hatred and violence, leading to a series of unfortunate events. Pawaskar’s name, however, did not feature in the list of accused in the final chargesheet.
The court not only granted time for the prosecutor’s response but also directed the police to ensure the security of the petitioner and witnesses involved in the case. The petitioners contend that police inaction violates fundamental rights and constitutional principles, including the right to life, equality, non-discrimination, secularism, fraternity, and religious tolerance.