Pune: The court of special MCOCA judge SS Kanthale on March 7 rejected the bail application of Parvez alias Sahil Haiderali Inamdar, a co-accused in the Sept 5, 2022, attack on organised crime detenu Tushar Hambir in the jail ward of the Sassoon General Hospital.Hambir was undergoing treatment for a back ailment at the time. The court held that there were ‘no reasonable grounds even to remotely believe innocence of the applicant/accused [Parvez] in the crime. Having regard to his conduct in the commission of crime and past record, bail was undesirable in the given set of facts.’ A total of 11 accused are facing trial in the case which, according to the police, resulted from a gang rivalry. Parvez along with rival gang leader Pratik Waghmare and three others had entered the hospital’s jail ward armed with sharp weapons and a firearm to kill Hambir and avenge the murder of one of their associates by the Hambir gang in 2017, the police said. A policeman on duty and Hambir’s brother-in-law Shubham Randad were injured as they prevented the attackers from approaching and assaulting Hambir. In the investigation that followed, the Bund Garden police arrested five attackers and their six associates, who were either part of the conspiracy or waiting downstairs at the time of the crime. The police also invoked provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against the 11 suspects, including Parvez who had five pending criminal cases to his name. The court held, “There emerged prima-facie material against the applicant/accused, showing his role and involvement in the crime. A premeditated attack was launched on the complainant [Hambir] who was in jail custody and underwent treatment at Sassoon hospital. The incident was not out of the spur of the moment, but was a well-planned and pre-hatched conspiracy.”“The TI (test identification) parade report and the CCTV footage clearly demonstrated the aggressive role of the applicant/accused in the assault. He has five criminal antecedents to his credit, which were of equally serious nature. No doubt, the six co-accused have been released on bail. However, their roles were quite different and not as grave as compared to the applicant/accused. Those who have been released on bail were either found to be waiting downstairs or not having participated in the actual act of assault,” the court noted while dismissing relief on the principle of parity.
