Murder case: Court raps P’kula police for shoddy probe
The faulty investigations of Panchkula police have again come to light with the court of district and sessions judge RK Sondhi in ‘State vs Ramesh Kumar’ not only passed strictures against investigating of ficer but also called for reinvestigation.chandigarh Updated: Apr 26, 2014 11:27 IST
The faulty investigations of Panchkula police have again come to light with the court of district and sessions judge RK Sondhi in ‘State vs Ramesh Kumar’ not only passed strictures against investigating of ficer but also called for reinvestigation.
In this case, Raj Kumar, a resident of Mauli Jagran, was found dead on the dividing road of Sectors 23/24 in Panchkula on the night of September 10, 2012.
The deceased was shot in the head from back and after that the bullet had passed through one of the eyes of the victim. The police had arrested two brothers-Ramesh and Suresh-for murder.
While acquitting both the brothers, the court pointed out, regarding motive theory, that deceased’s mother Santosh had told the court that Raj Kumar’s wife Reena was having illicit relations with Ramesh with the help of Pradeep.
Pradeep’s brother was accused of Rajesh alias Kala’s murder in Chandigarh. Rajesh was brother of Raj Kumar and in the trial Ramesh had turned hostile.
According to the police, as Ramesh had supported accused in the trial there was enmity between them which resulted in murder.
But the court pointed out that Pradeep’s role had never been investigated by sub- inspec -tor Narinder Kumar nor the deceased’s wife had been produced as witness in the court. “…There is no explanation why Pradeep was found innocent and what was basis. Even Reena, wife of deceased, has not been examined as a witness to support the motive theory, though she was the most important witness on this aspect…,” says the judgment.
It added, “…there is every possibility that the police failed to investigate the matter as required under the law and filed a false and incomplete charge sheet against the present accused despite that the fact that there is no further evidence on record to link the present accused with this crime.”
The judgment further said, “Even the last call made from the mobile phone of the deceased was not verified. As such it is a fit case which is based on faulty investig ations and which is required to be re-investigated on the above aspect.”