Land grab case: Probe ordered against Kripashankar
Posted on: 09:07 PM IST Oct 25, 2012
Mumbai: In fresh trouble for Kripashankar Singh, the Bombay High Court on Thursday ordered a magistrate inquiry against the former Mumbai Congress chief following a petition by a city-based social worker, who has accused the leader of threatening him after usurping his properties. A division bench of Justices VM Kanade and PD Kode was hearing the petition filed by one Tulsidas Nair alleging that Kripashankar and his son had usurped his properties worth crores and are now threatening to kill him if he doesn't evict his house in suburban Kalina.
According to Nair, Kripashankar usurped several of his properties in Kalina, Vakola and Bandra worth crores. "Since 2007, he (Kripashankar) has been sending his henchmen to my house in Kalina who assaulted and threaten to kill me if I continue my litigation against him," Nair said. When prosecutor PS Hingorani informed the court that following order from another bench of the High Court an armed constable has been assigned to the petitioner for protection, Nair claimed that the police are hand in glove with the Congress leader.
The court after perusing certain photographs and documents submitted by Nair directed the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to conduct and inquiry into the allegations and submit a report before the court within two weeks. Apart from the magistrate, the bench has also directed the State Human Rights Commission to make inquiry into the case. "If we notice that something is amiss then we will pass strictures against the concerned police and somebody will lose their job," Justice Kanade said.
The court has also directed the Director General of Police (Protection) to assign someone for Nair's protection. Kripashankar is already facing probe for amassing wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income. A special investigation team of the Economic Offences Wing of the city police had registered FIR against Kripashankar following High Court directions. The direction was passed during the hearing of a public interest litigation filed by one Sanjay Tiwari.