The Central Bureau of Investigation on Tuesday told the Bombay High Court it would attempt to complete its inquiries into the murder of rationalist Narendra Dabholkar by November 18 and file a chargesheet, reported PTI. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh appeared on behalf of the investigative agency.

Dabholkar was shot dead on August 20, 2013, in Pune when he was out on a morning walk. So far, the CBI has arrested seven persons in connection with the murder, many of whom were also allegedly involved in the killing of journalist Gauri Lankesh in Bengaluru in 2017. Last month, a court in Pune granted the agency custody of Hindutva activist Sharad Kalaskar, one of the accused in the case.

The CBI also took the prime accused in the Lankesh murder case, Amol Kale, into custody. In August, the agency arrested Sachin Andure, one of the two persons suspected to have shot Dabholkar, and ecovered a country-made pistol that was allegedly used in the crime.

Meanwhile, a Special Investigation Team of the Maharashtra Police on Wednesday told the court that it would investigate the roles of “some of the accused persons” in CBI custody to see if they were involved in the murder of Communist Party of India politician and author Govind Pansare. The police are likely to get custody of the accused within a week.

Two unidentified gunmen shot Pansare when he was on his way home from a morning walk in Kolhapur on February 16, 2015. He died four days later. His wife Uma, who was also shot at, survived the attack but now suffers from paralysis.

On Wednesday, the CBI and the Maharashtra Police submitted their progress reports to the court in sealed covers. The High Court ordered them to file progress reports again by November 22, when the case will be heard next.

The court also cautioned Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad chief Atulchandra Kulkarni against divulging the facts of its investigation to either the press or the general public. Last month, the court had criticised the Maharashtra Police for revealing information about “sensitive cases” to the media.