A special court in Bombay on April 19 acquitted private detective Satish Mangle, his actress-wife, Shraddha Mangle, and brother-in-law, Atul Tambe, in the case of attempt to extort Rs. 10 crore from IAS officer Radheshyam Mopalwar in 2017. The court observed that there were doubts in the prosecution’s case, the benefit of which should be given to the accused.
The Mangles have been in jail since their arrests in 2017. Tambe has been out on bail.
Special judge A.M. Patil referred to three alleged meetings between the accused and Mopalwar, where the alleged demand for money was made. The court pointed to the alleged meeting at Kharegaon toll naka on Nasik highway, and said that the call detail records showed that Mopalwar was not present in the meeting. Saying this, the judge acquitted the Mangles and Tambe, all of who burst out crying in the courtroom.
The prosecution’s case was that at the time of the incident, Mopalwar was vice president and managing director of the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC). It was submitted that Mopalwar came in contact with detective Satish Mangle owing to a family dispute. It was further alleged that on August 1, 2017, at Satish’s behest, an audio clip of Mopalwar’s purported phone conversations were broadcast on a TV news channel, allegedly alluding to corruption by Mopalwar. It was submitted that on account of this, the state government conducted an inquiry. It was also alleged that several complaints were lodged against Mopalwar with CBI, ED and the Income-Tax authorities, so that Satish Mangle could extort money from him.
The prosecution submitted that on October 23, 2017, Satish arranged a meeting in Kharegaon, attended by Mopalwar, the three accused and others, where Satish demanded Rs. 10 crore from Mopalwar. It was further alleged that because Satish changed his demand from time to time, a meeting was held at Juhu (Bombay) on October 31, 2017. It was alleged that Mopalwar recorded the conversation in which Satish demanded money.
Acquitting the trio, the judge referred to the Juhu meeting and said that while Mopalwar had used a spy camera, it was to be proved that the submitted evidence was direct output of it.