19 Mar 2024
Order issued
ConcludedThe Bombay High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: 2024:BHC-AS:13217-DB; 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 151
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2024-0004Mumbai Suburban, MaharashtraJudgment 19 March 2024
Ramprasad Versova, Mumbai Man vs Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma and Anr.
On 11 November 2006 a Mumbai Police squad led by encounter-specialist PI [name withheld] abducted Ramnarayan Gupta (Lakhan Bhaiya) and [name withheld] at Vashi, held them at Bhandup and D.N. Nagar police station, and shot Gupta dead in a staged encounter at Nana Nani Park, Versova, registering it as genuine (CR 302/2006). The trial court convicted 21 accused but acquitted Sharma; star witness [name withheld] was abducted and murdered in March 2011 before deposing. The Bombay High Court held the encounter fabricated on ballistic, CDR and false-record evidence, reversed Sharma's acquittal and sentenced him to life with concurrent terms, upheld the life sentences of 12 other policemen and one civilian, and acquitted six private accused for want of proof. Sharma's appeal was later admitted by the Supreme Court, which refused to suspend the conviction.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 19 March 2024 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 854 of 2013 and 350 of 2015 with connected appeals, the Bombay High Court (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, Gauri Godse, JJ.) recorded the conviction of 13 police personnel, namely: Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma (Police Inspector); Nitin Gorakhnath Sartape (Assistant Police Inspector); Sandip Hemraj Sardar (Police Constable); Tanaji Bhausaheb Desai (Police Constable); Pradeep Pandurang Suryawanshi (Police Inspector); Ratnakar Gautam Kamble (Police Constable); Vinayak Balasaheb Shinde (Police Constable); Devidas Gangaram Hari Sakpal (Police Constable); Anand Balaji Patade (Police Sub-Inspector); Dilip Sitaram Palande (Assistant Police Inspector); Pandurang Ganpat Kokam (Police Naik); Ganesh Ankush Harpude (Police Sub-Inspector); Prakash Ganpat Kadam (Head Constable).
- Register number
- MH 01 CW 0039
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal Nos. 854 of 2013 and 350 of 2015 with connected appeals / 2024:BHC-AS:13217-DB; 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 151
- Court and date
- Bombay High Court (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, Gauri Godse, JJ.), 19 March 2024
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma (Police Inspector); Nitin Gorakhnath Sartape (Assistant Police Inspector); Sandip Hemraj Sardar (Police Constable); Tanaji Bhausaheb Desai (Police Constable); Pradeep Pandurang Suryawanshi (Police Inspector); Ratnakar Gautam Kamble (Police Constable); Vinayak Balasaheb Shinde (Police Constable); Devidas Gangaram Hari Sakpal (Police Constable); Anand Balaji Patade (Police Sub-Inspector); Dilip Sitaram Palande (Assistant Police Inspector); Pandurang Ganpat Kokam (Police Naik); Ganesh Ankush Harpude (Police Sub-Inspector); Prakash Ganpat Kadam (Head Constable)
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 368 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 344 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 119 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “We, in the facts, find that it is not possible to take any other view than the view taken by us, having regard to the overwhelming evidence adduced by the prosecution. Thus, the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution even …” (at para 488-489)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction entered by High Court. Sentence: imprisonment.
- Present status of the proceedings
- Supreme Court of India, 8 April 2024: appeal pending.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Bombay High Court judgment dated 19 March 2024 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“We, in the facts, find that it is not possible to take any other view than the view taken by us, having regard to the overwhelming evidence adduced by the prosecution. Thus, the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution even …” (para 488-489)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
8 Apr 2024
Appeal pending
PendingAs of 8 April 2024, an appeal arising from this judgment was pending before the Supreme Court of India (officers: Anand Balaji Patade, [name withheld], Devidas Gangaram Hari Sakpal, Dilip Sitaram Palande, Ganesh Ankush Harpude, Nitin Gorakhnath Sartape, Pandurang Ganpat Kokam, Pradeep Pandurang Suryawanshi, Pradeep Rameshwar Sharma, [name withheld], Prakash Ganpat Kadam, Ratnakar Gautam Kamble, Sandip Hemraj Sardar, Tanaji Bhausaheb Desai, Vinayak Balasaheb Shinde); the judgment's findings had not been set aside on that date.
Source: LiveLaw
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
25 Sep 2026
(Audit fix: duplicate record CW-2024-0033 (same court, case number and judgment date) merged into this record; its sources are kept here and its URL redirects here.)
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.