3 minutes of readingBombayUpdated: February 10, 2026 12:12 pm IST
Noting that his name was mentioned in a panchama part of the charge sheet as a witness, a special court in Mumbai on Monday dismissed the owner of a photography studio from a gangster murder case in 2023. Vishal Utekar was acquitted by the special court appointed under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA) of all charges, including murder and criminal conspiracy.
He Bombay the police arrested Utekar on the allegation that he was the one who had tipped off the co-accused that gangster Sumit Yerunkar would come to his photo studio on December 24, 2023. Yerunkar was at the photo studio to click his photographs and display them on flexible banners in Chunabhatti area for his birthday; Five people arrived at the scene and shot him, police said.
Utekar, who was first named as a witness, was later charged, with police claiming that interrogation of an accused had revealed that he had informed them about the gangster’s location.
Utekar, through his lawyer Prashant Pawar, had said there was no evidence of his involvement – no co-accused’s statement was recorded against him, no call data records were collected and no other evidence was provided that he was part of the organized crime syndicate. Police had objected to the statement, saying there was evidence to charge him.
The court said that the investigating officers admitted that the call records and confession of the co-accused were not presented before the court in evidence, and no evidence was presented to claim that Utekar had tipped off others about the gangster’s visit to the studio. The court said Utekar also had no other case against him.
“It is appropriate to mention that in the pre-clearance order passed under the MCOCA, the name of the applicant/accused (Utekar) is not mentioned as an accused. In the ‘panchnama’, dated 11.01.2024, he is shown to be one of the witnesses. Subsequently, he is shown to be an accused of this offence. Taking into account all the above aspects, I conclude that there are no sufficient grounds to continue the proceedings against the applicant/accused,” Special Judge N.R. said. Pradhan.