Mumbai: A sessions court on Tuesday rejected the bail plea of a 21-year-old man arrested in connection with the murder of a Government Railway Police (GRP) head constable whose death was allegedly staged as a railway accident.Court denies bail to accused in GRP constable’s murderAdditional Sessions Judge Ajit A. Yadav denied bail to Pravin Aaba Panpatil, observing that the allegations disclosed a grave, premeditated offence and that there was a reasonable apprehension of the accused influencing prosecution witnesses if released.The case pertains to the death of Vijay Ramesh Chavan, 42, a head constable attached to the Panvel GRP, whose body was found on the railway tracks between Ghansoli and Rabale in the early hours of January 1, 2025.The death was initially treated as a railway accident. However, the investigation took a turn after the motorman of an approaching local train reported seeing two men throw a person onto the tracks. A post-mortem later revealed that Chavan had been strangled before being dumped on the tracks. The Vashi GRP subsequently registered a murder case and arrested four people, including Chavan’s wife, Pooja Chavan, her alleged lover Bhushan Brahmane, Panpatil and another associate.Investigators alleged that Chavan was lured to a party, strangled with a nylon rope after consuming alcohol, and his body was thrown before a moving train to make the killing appear accidental.Seeking bail, Panpatil argued that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons, there was no eyewitness to the alleged murder, no evidence showing he was last seen with the deceased, and no motive had been attributed to him. He contended that he had been implicated solely because he was a friend of one of the co-accused and that the charge sheet had already been filed.Opposing the plea, the prosecution argued that Panpatil was part of the conspiracy and had travelled to Mumbai with the co-accused before the incident. It alleged that he attended the party, helped purchase the nylon rope used in the murder and assisted in disposing of the body on the railway tracks. The prosecution relied on CCTV footage, electronic evidence, witness statements and other material collected during the investigation.Rejecting the plea, the court held that although the FIR had initially been registered against unknown persons, the investigation had subsequently uncovered material linking all four accused to the crime. It observed that the prosecution had produced electronic evidence and witness statements indicating Panpatil’s involvement and that the evidentiary value of the material could not be assessed at the bail stage.Referring to an earlier order denying bail to the deceased’s wife, the court said the present case stood on the same footing. It described the allegations as disclosing a premeditated murder and held that the gravity of the offence and the possibility of witness intimidation weighed against granting bail.