Search This Blog

Tuesday, 28 June 2011

5 legal loopholes in J.Dey murder case.


After assessing the information provided by Mumbai Police in J Dey’s case, I find that it is legally very weak. Police will face a tough time in the court. Following are the points which could jeopardize prosecution’s case during the trial.

1)    No Motive : Police has not come on record with a concrete motive on why Chota Rajan killed J Dey? It has to substantiate before the court that Rajan became an enemy of Dey & got him killed. So far there is no motive. Nothing could be fetched from the interrogation of Satish Kaliya as Rajan never revealed the identity of the target, nor he told Kaliya why he wanted to kill J Dey. It was a simple contract killing. Rajan asked Kaliya to kill a man for money, which he did.


2)    Link between Chota Rajan & Satish Kaliya: Police have nothing except Satish Kaliya’s extra judicial confession that he got a call from Chota Rajan to do the job. The question is how the police are going to prove in the court that the call Kaliya received was from Chota Rajan. There is no recording of such conversation. Moreover, Rajan calls from virtual numbers using internet phones, which make it almost impossible to trace the caller.


3)    No eye witnesses: There are not reliable eye witnesses who saw Kaliya shooting at J Dey. Police have got couple of so called “eye witnesses”, but it is questionable that they will survive the cross examination by defence lawyers in the court provided that it was raining at the time of shootout & most of the accused had covered their body & face with wind cheaters. Visibility was very bad. Even the sketch which police had released relying on these “eye witnesses” doesn’t match with the face of Satish Kaliya. CCTV footage has been of not much help & it could not be strong evidence in the court.


4)    Who paid the money? Satish Kaliya took Rs 5 lacs in 2 installments to execute the shootout. Firstly he got money from an unidentified man in Chembur & second time in Nalasopara. However, police have not been able to track the persons who paid this amount to Satish. If these persons are not arrested police will not be able to substantiate that Chota Rajan paid the money for the killing.

5)    No previous complaint from J Dey: Dey never made a formal complaint to the cops regarding any kind of threat to him. He never asked for security, nor applied for a weapons licence. None of his family members, friends, office colleagues & police officers he knew stated the police that J Dey had fear of an attack from Chota Rajan or any other gang. This fact could go against the prosecution in the court.

4 comments:

Vishwanath Seshadri said...

I agree with your analysis.. Mumbai police have done a commendable job as always in detecting the criminals but will have a big challenge proving this in court...

cheers

JANBAAZ said...

आपका विश्लेषण मुझे काफी हद तक सही लग रहा है |मुम्बई पोलिस अपने ऊपर हो रही छीचा लेदर से बचने क़े लिए ही इस अविश्वसनीय " निष्कर्ष " पर उतर आई है और तमाम लोगों की आँखों में धूल झोंक रही है |

anjani kumar said...

Jitu Ji, supari or contract Killing is known in society . If it is established that the job of accused is contract killing than motive of killer who actually have comiited the offence of murder for money will suffice the purpose . As the killing is done for money without bothering about the identity of the victim . therfore nexsus of
chota rajan and superfluous version of motive of chota rajan will not effect the either side of the case . Because chota rajan will be allegdly a conspirator therefore his motive is difficult to prove if there is no concrete eveidence .
For rest of the point i agree that even for establishing the contract killing the modus operandi of paymennt of money has to be established by the prosecution . if that will be established , in that case some link will also be established that who had paid money and why and /or on whose instructions the said paymenst was made . I agree that biggest lack in this case is "no eye witness" . Though, in such cases where the shooters are professionals any nearest circumstancial, eveidence may suffice the purposes . for instance , the sim cards recovered from shooters if used at the time of attack or before and after attack shows tower location of the said area and more so , if those sim cards had exchaged conversation before and after attack showing the movement of tower location as per their vehicle location in that case the same may be a good circumstancial eveidence . If any further evidence is collected which establish that those card belong to them that will be usefull . But , I know even though it is difficult to prove . Though, we should have faith in system . Do we have any option also ? . Let us wait for charge sheet .

Avinash said...

It is too early to look into all these aspect. Police have arrested these accused few days back. whatever evidence avilable that has already been collected by police.As far as Eye witness is concern police will never disclosed it till charge sheet is filed. So give some time for investigation, all these loop holes are already under consideration. Have faith in Mumbai police, give us some time. Everybody is reacting as if towmmorow the trial of case is going to start, it is not like that, we have ample time to look into all thses aspect. We will definatly do it properly. I think instead if mouting pressure on police, media should concentrate on issue of bringing Rajan back. That will not only help this case but also other numerous cases and we can prevent so many cases also. Think in that way.