Advocate Gunratna Sadavarte
MUMBAI: The prosecution on Monday told a Girgaum court advocate Gunratna Sadavarte, arrested in connection with the violence outside Sharad Pawar‘s residence last Friday, had made a WhatsApp call to someone in Nagpur the same afternoon and received a message from that person saying ‘Reporters pathva’ (‘Send reporters’). Stating they need to explore this angle, police demanded his further custody. The court extended Sadavarte‘s police custody till April 11.
Meanwhile, police said they had intelligence inputs about some protestors landing at Silver Oak on April 5 and adequate bandobast was deployed. But no one came that day. A police officer said there was no subsequent development on this front.
The Gamdevi police had arrested 109 striking MSRTC workers for stone-pelting, assaulting a cop, and hurling shoes at Pawar’s residence on Friday, April 8. All were sent to judicial custody for 14 days. Sadavarte, who has been representing MSRTC workers, was also held and sent to police custody till Monday.
Gamdevi police on Monday sought a production warrant against four of the accused workers, saying they have got evidence and need to interrogate them in police custody. The four were allegedly talking about the protest. Police suspect they deleted messages from their phones. The four will be produced before court on Tuesday.
Pradip Gharat, special PP, said, ” Sadavarte is not ready to give the phone he used before April, or has destroyed it. He has taken Rs 550 from each MSRTC worker and this way collected Rs 1.8 crore. Also, police have to find out who is the person in Nagpur whose name has been disclosed in his call records and who sent a message to Sadavarte through WhatsApp since all other calls are normal calls, while this call to Nagpur is a WA call and the message had also been received from this number on WhatsApp.”
Defence counsel Girish Kulkarni said, “Police claimed some amounts were paid by MSRTC employees. But the case is not of misappropriation. The case is of unlawful assembly, but my client was not present at the spot and cannot be claimed to have committed the crime.”
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA
Advocate Gunratna SadavarteMUMBAI: The prosecution on Monday told a Girgaum court advocate Gunratna Sadavarte, arrested in connection with the violence outside Sharad Pawar’s residence last Friday, had made a WhatsApp call to someone in Nagpur the same afternoon and received a message from that person saying ‘Reporters pathva’ (‘Send reporters’). Stating they need to explore this angle, police demanded his further custody. The court extended Sadavarte’s police custody till April 11. Meanwhile, police said they had intelligence inputs about some protestors landing at Silver Oak on April 5 and adequate bandobast was deployed. But no one came that day. A police officer said there was no subsequent development on this front. The Gamdevi police had arrested 109 striking MSRTC workers for stone-pelting, assaulting a cop, and hurling shoes at Pawar’s residence on Friday, April 8. All were sent to judicial custody for 14 days. Sadavarte, who has been representing MSRTC workers, was also held and sent to police custody till Monday. Gamdevi police on Monday sought a production warrant against four of the accused workers, saying they have got evidence and need to interrogate them in police custody. The four were allegedly talking about the protest. Police suspect they deleted messages from their phones. The four will be produced before court on Tuesday. Pradip Gharat, special PP, said, ” Sadavarte is not ready to give the phone he used before April, or has destroyed it. He has taken Rs 550 from each MSRTC worker and this way collected Rs 1.8 crore. Also, police have to find out who is the person in Nagpur whose name has been disclosed in his call records and who sent a message to Sadavarte through WhatsApp since all other calls are normal calls, while this call to Nagpur is a WA call and the message had also been received from this number on WhatsApp.” Defence counsel Girish Kulkarni said, “Police claimed some amounts were paid by MSRTC employees. But the case is not of misappropriation. The case is of unlawful assembly, but my client was not present at the spot and cannot be claimed to have committed the crime.” FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA