A Mumbai sessions court on Saturday (June 20, 2026), citing a lack of credible evidence, acquitted all eight accused, including Lok Sabha MP and senior leader of the Nationalist Congress Party-Sharadchandra Pawar (NCP-SP) Padamsinh Patil, in the 2006 murder of former MLA Pawanraje Nimbalkar and his driver.
The court pointed to multiple flaws in the investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), including unreliable witnesses, missing mobile phone records, and inconsistent statements.
Of the nine accused previously, one person had turned an approver.
Nimbalkar and his driver were shot dead by two assailants in Kalamboli, Navi Mumbai, on June 3, 2006. Mr. Patil and the other accused, who allegedly hatched executed a conspiracy to kill Nimbalkar for a sum of ₹25 lakh, stand acquitted after two decades. The prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, the court said.
Apart from Mr. Patil, 86, the other accused are Satish Mandade, Mohan Shukla, Shashikant Kulkarni, Kailash Yadav, Dinesh Tiwari, Pintu Singh (the main shooter), and Chhote Pandey.
Then an incumbent MP, Mr. Patil was arrested by the CBI three years after the incident, on June 6, 2009, securing bail a few months later on a personal bond of ₹2 lakh following the filing of the charge-sheet.
After Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde requested Union Home Minister Amit Shah to look into the case, the CBI is slated to challenge the verdict in the Bombay High Court.
“As CBI had brought out very good evidence against the accused in the case, CBI will be challenging the judgment of the trial court before the High Court,” the CBI said in a statement on Saturday (June 20, 2026).
One of the primary reasons for the acquittal was the unreliability of a key witness, an accused who later turned an approver. This approver had a history of lying, the court said. The witness owned several properties and had substantial assets, making it implausible that he would commit such a crime for a sum of ₹50,000, the court said, adding the witness’s version of events could not be trusted.
The investigation also suffered from significant procedural lapses. The police did not seize the mobile phones of the accused or obtain their call detail records, which could have clarified if the accused had been in contact with each other, the court said, terming the absence of these records a major flaw.
Moreover, the approver’s account of his movements on the day of the murder changed multiple times. In his statements, he provided four different versions of the route travelled by him. The contradictions and frequent changes rendered the approver’s testimony unreliable, the court said.
There were also discrepancies regarding the vehicle used for committing the crime. The car was completely burnt, but the seizure report mentioned its colour as green. How could the colour be determined from a burnt vehicle, the court asked. There were also differing accounts on where the vehicle had been found. One witness said the vehicle was found near a small house, another said it was found near a bungalow, while police records showed it was found on an open plot of land. These inconsistencies rendered the investigation suspect, the court said.
The key witness also claimed he had met former Commissioner of Police Rakesh Maria and given him a bottle of scotch whisky. Mr. Maria had denied the claim, and the CBI had not investigated the matter further, the court said.
The CBI had included in the charge-sheet a letter that Nimbalkar had written to a District Collector in 2003. In the letter, Nimbalkar had said he was concerned for his safety, naming former Maharashtra Home Minister and Lok Sabha MP Padamsingh Patil. The CBI had failed to investigate the origin and circumstances of this letter, which should have been a cause for concern, the judge said.
The court acknowledged the political rivalry between Nimbalkar and Mr. Patil following the 2002 Assembly election. However, that animosity alone was not enough to convict a person, the court said, emphasising the need for concrete evidence.
Unfortunate, says son
The Nimbalkar family expressed shock at the verdict. Omraje Nimbalkar, the son of the Pavanraje Nimbalkar, and an incumbent MP, said the judgment was unfortunate and surprising. He would challenge the verdict in the High Court and, if necessary, in the Supreme Court, Mr. Omraje Nimbalkar said. Remarking on the “state of the justice system”, he said the present times were “difficult for the virtuous”.
Mr. Omraje Nimbalkar had earlier indicated that he may move to the Shiv Sena led by Mr. Shinde. However, following the verdict, he said he would consult with the people in his constituency before taking any final decision on his political future. The initial investigation had been “managed”, he claimed.
Mr. Shinde also termed the court’s verdict “unfortunate”.
Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray or UBT) leader Ambadas Danve expressed anger and disappointment over the verdict. Despite evidence, the accused had been acquitted, which shakes the public’s faith in the justice system, Mr. Danve said.
Published – June 20, 2026 02:18 pm IST
