Pune police have registered a second FIR linked to the MPSC protest in Navi Peth, naming five people, including Maharashtra Youth Congress president Shivraj More, for allegedly flying a drone without permission over the gathering on October 5.
The Vishrambaug police registered the case at 1.56 am on October 10 under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which deals with disobedience of an order issued by a public servant. The FIR concerns the protest near S M Joshi Bridge during the visit of CJP leader Abhijit Dipke and Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut.
The other people named are photographer Digambar Bharat Khare, Pramod Patil, Hrishikesh Gangurde and Akshay Kamble. The case follows a complaint by police head constable Yuvraj Bharat Tele, who said he was deployed at the protest site at about 7.30 pm on October 5.
According to the complaint, Tele noticed a drone flying over the gathering and traced its operator, Khare, to an open area behind the venue. He then alerted senior police inspector Navnath Jagtap and police sub-inspector Kudale, who were also on duty at the protest site.
The complaint states that Khare allegedly told the police he did not have permission from the local police to operate the drone. He allegedly said he was recording the protest on the instructions of More, Patil, Gangurde and Kamble. Police then directed him to land the device.
Investigators seized a DJI drone camera valued at approximately Rs 40,000 and its remote controller, valued at Rs 10,000, according to the FIR. The equipment was recorded in a seizure panchnama prepared in the presence of two witnesses and was subsequently sealed.
Police also asked Khare to submit documents showing that he had obtained permission to operate the drone. The FIR states that he allegedly failed to produce those documents. Police sub-inspector Shobha Teli is investigating the case.
The latest action came a day after Vishrambaug police registered another FIR against 15 people over alleged violations during the MPSC agitation. The protests have focused on candidates’ demands for transparency in recruitment and action over alleged irregularities.
The case places the use of aerial recording equipment at a public protest within the police’s wider management of a crowded urban gathering. The FIR, however, records allegations and seizure proceedings; it does not establish guilt against the people named. Further action will depend on the investigation by the Vishrambaug police.
