Baba Siddique Murder Cop Denies Defying Court On Bishnoi S Custody

The investigating officer in the Baba Siddique murder case on Wednesday denied disobeying the MCOCA court’s directions to secure the custody of accused gangster Anmol Bishnoi. He argued that a central government order restricting Bishnoi’s removal from Tihar Jail prevented his physical custody and that video-conferencing suggested by the court could not legally substitute his first physical presence in court.

Assistant commissioner of police Subhash Dhudhgaonkar was responding to a show-cause notice issued by Special Judge Satyanarayan Navander on August 5, after the court found that his conduct prima facie reflected deliberate disregard of its July 10 directions to make efforts to secure Bishnoi’s custody.

The issue arose from an application filed by Baba Siddique’s widow, Shehzeen Zaiuddin Siddique, through advocates Trivankumar Karnani and Pradip Gharat, seeking directions to secure Bishnoi’s custody. Bishnoi, an absconding accused in the case, is lodged in Tihar Jail in connection with an NIA case and the court said his presence was required for the effective conduct of the trial.

The prosecution had maintained that his physical custody was necessary for interrogation but could not be obtained because of a December 5, 2025, order passed by the central government, prohibiting his removal from Tihar Jail for one year or until the conclusion of a Delhi case, whichever was earlier.

The court, however, said the order did not prevent the police from taking further steps. In its July 10 order, it observed that the agency had not made “sincere efforts” to secure Bishnoi and said that, even if physical custody could not be obtained, his production through video-conferencing could be explored.

The court also said the investigating officer could visit the jail for interrogation, if permissible, while securing Bishnoi’s presence before the Mumbai court through video-conferencing so that the trial was not delayed.

The August 5 order records that the police instead obtained a production warrant and moved the Patiala House court in Delhi seeking Bishnoi’s physical production. The Delhi court rejected the request, relying on the same December 5 restraint order.

The MCOCA court criticised Dhudhgaonkar’s compliance report, saying it was “conspicuously silent” about any attempt to secure Bishnoi through video-conferencing or another legally permissible mode indicated in the July 10 order.