Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court recently refused anticipatory bail to a lawyer whom former Maharashtra Pradesh Congress vice-president Hidayat Patel allegedly named in his dying declaration. The court observed that Hidayat’s statement to three witnesses prima facie indicated involvement of the petitioner in the murder conspiracy.Justice MM Nerlikar said petitioner Fazil Kha Asif Kha’s custodial interrogation was required to determine the truth and unravel the alleged conspiracy.Hidayat Patel was stabbed in Akot city in Akola district on Jan 6, 2026, and succumbed to his injuries on Jan 7 while undergoing treatment. Police arrested prime accused Ubed Patel (25) after he was allegedly captured on CCTV carrying out the attack. Hidayat was also the district president of Akola and had twice contested the Akola Lok Sabha seat.The prosecution case against the petitioner stems from what Hidayat allegedly told witnesses while being taken to hospital after the attack. As per the FIR and witness statements, Hidayat said Ubed had told him that he was being killed at the behest of some persons. He allegedly further disclosed that the petitioner-lawyer had assured Ubed that he would secure his acquittal in the case.Kha’s counsel argued that his alleged role was limited to such an assurance, and that witnesses who were present in the mosque when Hidayat was attacked had not named him. The defence also pointed to call records, submitting that there was no communication between Kha and Ubed before or after the incident.Opposing his contentions, senior counsel Subodh Dharmadhikari and public prosecutor Neeraj Jawade argued that when there is a conspiracy, it is always hatched in secrecy and there cannot be any direct material available as evidence. There are also several calls between the petitioner and other accused, they said.The court noted the absence of such calls. “There is no call between the prime accused and the petitioner either before or after the incident,” it observed, while noting that there were calls between Kha and other accused, though those communications had taken place much earlier.Justice Nerlikar found the alleged dying declaration important at the anticipatory-bail stage. He further noted that the three witnesses had given identical accounts of what Hidayat allegedly disclosed while being taken to hospital. “The name of the petitioner appears as the dying declaration was made to these witnesses by the deceased,” the court said.The court also referred to its earlier rejection of anticipatory bail applications filed by co-accused, whose names were allegedly disclosed by Hidayat. One of the accused had approached Supreme Court but subsequently withdrew the plea.Holding that the alleged conspiracy required further investigation and custodial interrogation, High Court rejected Kha’s plea. The court’s observations were prima facie and confined to consideration of anticipatory bail.
