Padamsinh Patil Acquitted In 2006 Nimbalkar Murder Case

A Mumbai sessions court on Saturday acquitted senior Nationalist Congress Party-Sharadchandra Pawar leader Padamsinh Patil and seven co-accused in the 2006 murder case of former MLA Pawanraje Nimbalkar, citing major investigative lapses and an absolute lack of credible evidence from the prosecution.

The trial court highlighted extensive vulnerabilities in the probe conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The judge pointed to highly untrustworthy witness testimonies, absent mobile phone records, and contradictory statements that undermined the entire framework of the prosecution’s case.

Initially, the high-profile case involved nine accused individuals, though one eventually transitioned into an approver for the state.

Nimbalkar and his driver were fatally shot by two gunmen in Kalamboli, Navi Mumbai, on June 3, 2006. Patil and the remaining accused, who allegedly orchestrated the assassination plot for a financial sum of ₹25 lakh, stand cleared after 20 years. The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Beyond the 86-year-old Patil, the acquitted individuals include Satish Mandade, Mohan Shukla, Shashikant Kulkarni, Kailash Yadav, Dinesh Tiwari, primary shooter Pintu Singh, and Chhote Pandey.

Then a sitting Member of Parliament, Patil was apprehended by federal investigators three years post-incident on June 6, 2009. He secured bail several months later on a personal bond of ₹2 lakh following the submission of the formal charge-sheet.

Following direct requests from Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, the CBI is preparing to contest the ruling in the Bombay High Court.

The central agency released a statement on Saturday, June 20, 2026, asserting that it had presented robust evidence against the accused during the trial and would definitely appeal the verdict before the high court.

A central factor behind the acquittal was the complete unreliability of the state’s primary witness, an accused turned approver. The court noted this individual possessed a documented background of fabrication. The judge observed that the witness owned multiple assets, making the claim that he engaged in a capital crime for a mere ₹50,000 highly improbable.

The judicial assessment also exposed glaring procedural errors. Investigators failed to confiscate the mobile devices of the suspects or retrieve their call detail records. The court labeled the absence of these records a critical failure that could have verified telephonic contact between the co-conspirators.

Furthermore, the approver altered his timeline regarding his whereabouts on the day of the double murder. The witness offered four conflicting narratives about his travel route, rendering his core testimony entirely untrustworthy in the eyes of the court.

Severe discrepancies also emerged regarding the getaway vehicle used during the crime. Though the automobile was discovered entirely incinerated, the official police seizure document identified its color as green. The court questioned how a color could be determined from a charred frame.

Conflicting accounts also surrounded the discovery site of the vehicle. One witness claimed it sat near a small residence, another specified a bungalow, while official police filings localized it to an open plot. These sharp contradictions made the entire investigative procedure highly suspect.

The primary witness additionally claimed he met former Mumbai Police Commissioner Rakesh Maria to deliver a bottle of scotch whisky. Maria explicitly denied this interaction, and the court admonished the federal agency for failing to investigate the matter.

The CBI had integrated a letter written by Nimbalkar to a District Collector in 2003 into its formal charge-sheet. The document expressed severe safety anxieties and explicitly named former state home minister Padamsinh Patil. The judge noted that the agency failed to investigate its origin.

While acknowledging the intense political rivalry born from the 2002 Assembly elections between Nimbalkar and Patil, the court maintained that political animosity alone cannot replace concrete evidence required for a criminal conviction.

Unfortunate, says son

The victim’s family expressed deep shock over the judicial outcome. Omraje Nimbalkar, the son of the deceased leader and a sitting MP, described the judgment as deeply unfortunate. He vowed to challenge the acquittal in the High Court and the Supreme Court, lamenting the current state of the justice system.

Though Omraje previously indicated a potential political move toward the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena faction, he deferred his final political decision until consulting his constituency. He alleged that the initial police investigation had been heavily manipulated.

Chief Minister Shinde similarly described the sessions court verdict as highly unfortunate.

Expressing anger, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Ambadas Danve stated that acquitting the accused despite available evidence severely damages public faith in the nation’s judicial framework.

History of the Nimbalkar-Patil Rivalry

મુંબઈ: ધારાશિવ જિલ્લાના સાંસદ ઓમરાજે નિમ્બાળકરના પિતા પવનરાજે નિમ્બાળકર અને તેમના ડ્રાઇવરના હત્યા કેસમાં કોર્ટે 20 જૂને 20 વર્ષે ચુકાદો આપ્યો છે. આ કેસના મુખ્ય આરોપી અને ભૂતપૂર્વ ગૃહ પ્રધાન પદ્મસિંહ પાટીલ સહિત અન્ય આરોપીઓને કોર્ટે નિર્દોષ જાહેર કર્યા છે. આ ચુકાદા બાદ પદ્મસિંહ પાટિલના પુત્ર અને વિધાનસભ્ય રાણા જગજીતસિંહ પાટીલે મીડિયા સાથે વાતચીત કરતા જણાવ્યું હતું કે, ‘પદ્મસિંહ પાટિલ વિરુદ્ધ કાવતરું ઘડાયું હતું, પરંતુ આજે અમને ન્યાય મળ્યો.’

Following the verdict, MLA Rana Jagjitsinh Patil, son of Padamsinh Patil, asserted that his father was the victim of a deep-seated political conspiracy. He emphasized that the family maintained unwavering faith in the judiciary throughout the 20-year legal struggle.

Rana Jagjitsinh Patil raised questions about political retribution, pointing out that his father had to endure decades of public ignominy despite having no connection to the murder. He claimed the hidden facts behind the conspiracy would slowly surface.

He revealed that Padamsinh Patil was originally slated to become the Chief Minister of Maharashtra back in the 1990s under a political promise. However, that transition never materialized due to internal political maneuvers.

Following his election as an MP in 2009, a conspiracy was allegedly hatched by political rivals to block his entry into the union cabinet during an impending expansion. The family stated they would release a detailed breakdown after reviewing the complete court order.

The daughter-in-law of the senior leader, Archana Patil, expressed emotional relief following the judgment, stating that the family had finally been vindicated after decades of political targeting and systemic stress.

FAQs

Who was acquitted in the 2006 Pawanraje Nimbalkar murder case?

Former Maharashtra minister and NCP-SP leader Padamsinh Patil was acquitted alongside seven other co-accused, including Satish Mandade, Mohan Shukla, Shashikant Kulkarni, Kailash Yadav, Dinesh Tiwari, Pintu Singh, and Chhote Pandey.

Why did the court acquit all the accused?

The Mumbai sessions court cited an absolute lack of credible evidence, severe procedural lapses by the CBI, contradictory statements by the state’s star witness, and missing call detail records that failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Will the trial court’s decision be challenged?

Yes, the Central Bureau of Investigation and Pawanraje Nimbalkar’s son, sitting MP Omraje Nimbalkar, have both confirmed that they will legally challenge the acquittal before the Bombay High Court.