Pune: Right to Information (RTI) Act has completed 15 years a few days before. While the entire country was celebrating this fact, one RTI activist Ravindra Laxman Barhate, a resident of Madhusudha Apartment, Lullanagar in Bibwewadi, has been booked under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).
Recent investigation into several land grabbing and extortion cases has revealed that Barhate along with other accomplices including dismissed cop Shailesh Jagtap, ex-journalist Devendra Jain and 10 others were involved in these serious offences. Based on this information, Additional Commissioner of Police (Crime) Ashok Morale issued orders on Monday night to slap MCOCA against Barhate and his gang members.
The 13 members of the ‘gang’ have booked earlier under several offenses of extortion, intimidation, land grabbing and other crimes. A total of 14 FIR’s have been registered against them at various police stations in Pune city and rural areas.
A case has been registered against Ravindra Laxman Barhate, a resident of Madhusudha Apartment, Lullanagar in Bibwewadi, and his associates. This case is in connection with Barhate and his accomplices threatening a hotelier and attempting to grab his land plot. This FIR was lodged in September month at the Hadapsar police station. Along with Barhate, Jagtap and Jain, the other accomplices in this case include another dismissed cop Parvez Jamadar, Vishal Dhore, Sujit Singh, Aslam Pathan, Balaji Lakhade, Sachin Dhivar, Vitthal Reddy, Ganesh Amande, Nitin Ramdas Pawar.
Earlier, two builders Sudhir Karnataki and Rishikesh Bartakke had lodged separate cases against the suspects at Kothrud and Samarth police station. Barhate is still absconding and his anticipatory bail has been rejected by the Supreme Court.
In the Khadak case, Satyabhama Popat Chandgude (40) a resident of Chikhali has lodged the complaint. According to the FIR, Jagtap and his accomplices had taken Rs 20 lakh from the complainant in connection with a deal of land parcel in Undri. When the possession of the land plot was denied, the complainant demanded her money back. At that point, Jagtap threatened her of implicating in a false criminal case. When the complainant came to know about two complaints lodged against Jagtap in the recent past, she decided to come forward and register her complaint too.
