• Santosh Deshmukh Murder Case: A Biased Trial?

• Why Ujjwal Nikam’s Appointment in Deshmukh Case Sparks Controversy?

Unmesh Gujarathi
Sprouts News Network

The brutal murder of Santosh Deshmukh, the sarpanch of Massajog village in Maharashtra’s Beed district, has sparked significant political controversy. The appointment of senior advocate Ujjwal Nikam as the special public prosecutor in this case has raised questions about potential political influence, given his past political affiliations and his history of handling high-profile cases.

• Political Controversy Surrounding Nikam’s Appointment

Advocate Ujjwal Nikam, known for prosecuting high-profile cases like the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, has been appointed as the public prosecutor in this case. However, his appointment is being questioned due to his past association with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Nikam contested elections on a BJP ticket but lost, raising concerns about his political neutrality.

The controversy is further fueled by the fact that the alleged mastermind in this case is Dhananjay Munde, a senior leader from the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and a minister in the previous Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government. The BJP-led government, with Devendra Fadnavis as the Home Minister, has appointed Nikam, which has led to speculation that the prosecution may be biased.

• Concerns Over a Fair Trial

Santosh Deshmukh’s murder case has already garnered significant political attention. Critics argue that since Nikam has ties to the BJP, his role as a prosecutor could influence the case’s outcome. Moreover, Nikam’s son had previously represented Dhananjay Munde in another legal matter, adding another layer of conflict of interest.

This situation has led many to demand that Fadnavis reconsider Nikam’s appointment. Activist groups and legal experts argue that a politically neutral prosecutor should handle the case to ensure an unbiased trial.

• Ujjwal Nikam’s Track Record and Past Controversies

Nikam’s legal career has not been without controversy. In the infamous Bhotmange family massacre case in Khairlanji (2006), where four Dalit family members were brutally killed, Nikam was the prosecutor. Despite the horrific nature of the crime, the case did not see convictions under the Atrocities Act, and many of the accused were acquitted.

Similarly, in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks trial, while Ajmal Kasab was sentenced to death, two other accused, Faheem Ansari and Sabahuddin Ahmed, were acquitted despite allegedly having maps of sensitive locations. Nikam later admitted to fabricating the infamous “Kasab asked for mutton biryani” story to manipulate public sentiment.

Also Read: HT Boss Shobhana Bhartia’s Husband Shyam Bhartia Booked for Rape

• Demands for Nikam’s Removal

In light of these concerns, activists and political observers argue that Nikam’s involvement in the Santosh Deshmukh murder case could compromise justice. The Sprouts team is planning to submit a formal letter to Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, urging him to remove Nikam from this case.

Furthermore, Fadnavis has not yet taken action against police officials allegedly involved in the Deshmukh case, raising further doubts about the transparency of the investigation.

Ultimately, the decision to allow Nikam to continue as the special public prosecutor will determine whether justice prevails or if political interests overshadow the legal process.

Controversies Surrounding Ujjwal Nikam in the Kasab Case

• Exorbitant Fees for Kasab Trial

Advocate Ujjwal Nikam, appointed as the Special Public Prosecutor in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks trial, was paid a hefty fee of over Rs 10,000 per day, totaling approximately Rs 9 lakh for about 90 days of hearings. In contrast, Kasab’s court-appointed defense lawyers received less than Rs 1 lakh each. This significant disparity raised questions about the excessive financial benefits Nikam received from the case.

• Fabricated “Mutton Biryani” Story

In 2015, Nikam admitted that his claim about Kasab demanding mutton biryani in custody was completely false. He stated that he “made up the statement to divert people’s attention” and to prevent any sympathy towards Kasab. However, this deception sparked outrage among legal professionals, who criticized him for misleading the public and potentially influencing judicial proceedings through fabricated narratives.

• An Easy Case, But Maximum Publicity

Legal experts argue that Kasab’s conviction was a straightforward case for the Maharashtra government. The prosecution had overwhelming evidence, including CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts, making it an easy win even for less experienced lawyers. Despite this, Nikam gained immense fame from the trial, leveraging it for personal recognition and financial gains.

• Unexplained Wealth and Government Investigation Demand

Nikam’s rising prominence and financial success after the Kasab trial have led to suspicions about his earnings. Critics believe that the government should investigate his financial assets, including land holdings and other wealth accumulated over the years. Given his close association with high-profile political figures, transparency in his financial dealings is essential.

Nikam’s role in the Kasab case, while celebrated by many, remains controversial due to these unresolved questions. His fabricated statements and disproportionate financial gains continue to cast doubt on the ethical standards of his legal career.