Baramati court denies bail to co-accused in scrap dealer’s abduction for Rs15L ransom | Pune News


Baramati court denies bail to co-accused in scrap dealer’s abduction for Rs15L ransom

Pune: A Baramati sessions court rejected the bail application of Ashok Ganpat Bansode, a co-accused in the alleged abduction of a Vanjarwadi scrap dealer in Sept 2024 for Rs15 lakh ransom, observing that the allegations were serious in nature and the modus operandi adopted indicated “ulterior motive and intention”.The defence had argued that Bansode’s involvement was based only on the statement of a co-accused and no recovery was made from him. The prosecution opposed the plea, submitting that there was prima facie material and bail applications of the other co-accused had already been rejected.Additional sessions judge Surekha R Patil held in her order on Feb 18 that “it would not be just and proper to release the accused on bail only on the ground that his name was disclosed by another accused and he was transferred from another case registered against him.” The judge recorded that the role of the other accused people and that of the accused/applicant was similar. Therefore, on that ground also, the accused/ applicant was not entitled to get bail, she observed. A gang allegedly posing as Crime Branch police officers had abducted the scrap dealer from Vanjarwadi in Sept 2024 after he refused to purchase a car brought to his shop. The accused allegedly forced him into a vehicle, drove him across multiple places and demanded Rs15 lakh, accusing him of dealing in stolen property. The victim alleged he was assaulted and threatened with an “encounter” if he failed to pay. He was later left near a petrol pump. He subsequently lodged a complaint.The FIR was registered at Yavat police station in Daund taluka for offences under sections 204 (pretending to be a public servant), 307 (theft committed after making preparations to cause death, hurt or restraint to any person), 140-2 (kidnapping), 3(5) [acts done by several people in furtherance of a common intention] of the BNS and Section 3(25) of the Arms Act.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *