In a significant development for a complex murder investigation, a Mumbai sessions court has granted permission for a Belgian probe team to interrogate three individuals currently held in city prisons. The accused are implicated in the 2024 slaying of a man with speech and hearing impairments, a case that has drawn an international dimension due to a wanted Belgian resident.
The gruesome crime came to light in August 2024 when the body of the victim, 30-year-old Arshad Shaikh, was discovered concealed within a trolley bag at Dadar railway station. Shaikh had reportedly been murdered in south Mumbai’s Pydhonie area. Authorities allege he was killed by two acquaintances, Pravin Chavda and Shivjit Singh.
Further investigation led to the arrest of Shaikh’s wife, Rukhsana Shaikh. Police contend she was involved in an extramarital affair with Chavda and was privy to the conspiracy to kill her husband. All four individuals accused in the case, including the victim, share the same speech and hearing disabilities.
Adding an international layer to the case, Jagpalpreet Singh, a resident of Belgium, stands accused of instigating the Mumbai-based co-accused to commit the murder. Belgian authorities had questioned Singh in October 2024 after he reportedly shared videos of his calls with the two primary accused on WhatsApp groups, leading members to report his alleged involvement. However, an earlier request from Mumbai police for Singh’s extradition was denied by Belgium.
Currently, Pravin Chavda and Shivjit Singh are incarcerated at Mumbai’s Arthur Road Jail, while Rukhsana Shaikh is held at the Byculla women’s prison.
Earlier this week, the Mumbai police presented an application to the court of Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Kale. The application informed the court of a communication received from the central government detailing a planned visit by a Belgian team to conduct interrogations concerning Singh’s involvement.
The police’s plea outlined the composition of the Belgian delegation: two police officers from Belgium, a judge, a government lawyer, three additional police officers, a videographer, and an interpreter. It sought the court’s approval for this team to visit the prisons and conduct their investigations, along with appropriate directives for the jail authorities. The Belgian team is scheduled to be in India between October 11 and 18.
After reviewing the case documents, the court acknowledged the existing Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Republic of India and the Kingdom of Belgium. This treaty establishes a framework for both nations to facilitate requests for legal assistance in criminal cases.
“In view of the treaty, the central government has issued directions to the police of Maharashtra in respect of the present crime/case,” the court stated. The court subsequently disposed of the police’s application, emphasizing that the applicant, acting under the guidance of the central government and relevant Maharashtra authorities, is expected to meticulously adhere to these directions.
The court explicitly cautioned that police authorities and agencies operating under the Centre’s mandate “are expected to strictly adhere to the law of the country ensuring that there is absolutely no violation of any of the rights of the accused person guaranteed to them by the Constitution of India.” It further mandated that the police must meaningfully comply with the Centre’s directives and furnish a report on their adherence.
Meanwhile, the defense counsel, Prakash Salsingikar and Ganesh Nagargoje, raised concerns, asserting that under the Indian Constitution, every individual possesses the right to be heard and present their side before the court. They specifically highlighted that they had not been provided with copies of the application seeking to question the accused.
Addressing these concerns, the court instructed the police to inform the accused’s advocates when complying with the central government’s directions. Furthermore, it ruled that the defense lawyers for the accused, along with their interpreter, must be permitted to be present during the interview process.
