ASHWINI KAMAT
PANAJI
Thirteen days on,Valpoi police are yet to achieve a breakthrough in the ongoing ‘preliminary inquiry’ into the allegations leveled against Poriem BJP candidate Vishwajit Krishnarao Rane of murdering Shanu Gaonkar, who was reported missing in 2006.
It appears that the police are conducting an investigation under the label of a ‘preliminary inquiry’ and questions are being raised as to why the police are attempting to make out a cognizable offence when the offence of murder made out in the allegations levelled against Rane is necessarily ‘cognizable’ as per legal definition of the term.
Legal experts, on condition of anonymity, have expressed the opinion that the police can register an FIR and after duly concluding the investigation, file either a chargesheet against the accused or a summary report if no evidence or material is found against the accused during the investigation.
Thereafter, the police can also consider filing a complaint against the complainant if the allegations are found to be false. Filing of a B-summary report against the complainant is a legal option.
Allegations in this matter had surfaced through a video recorded by an RTI activist on February 16, which was posted on the Facebook page of Goa Police.
In the video, Ardalkar claimed that Rane killed Gaonkar on the suspicion of his involvement in the murder of his brother Prithviraj Rane on December 28, 2005. Valpoi police chargesheet had named six persons in the murder of Prithviraj but Shanu was not included in the list.
To begin with, the video and Ardalkar’s statement make out the cognizable offence of murder. During the inquiry, though Ardalkar wavered on specifics of his involvement in the case, he has stood by his accusation that Rane murdered Gaonkar.
However, after questioning Rane for two hours on March 3, in addition to around 30 to 35 other persons, police continue to claim that a cognizable offence is yet to be made out against the BJP candidate.
The police team probing the matter has taken refuge under the Supreme Court judgment in Lalita Kumari case of 2013 whereby police can initiate a preliminary inquiry in a case where there is abnormal delay in initiating criminal prosecution and in reporting the matter without satisfactorily explaining the reasons for such delay.
But the apex court judgement clearly states, “The scope of preliminary inquiry
