NRI charged with murdering ex-fiancée 10 yrs ago acquitted
A local court here on Monday acquitted Kuldeep Singh, a native of Barnala and resident of Philippines, in a 10-year-old murder case of Ramanpreet Kaur, 22.chandigarh Updated: Apr 08, 2015 14:00 IST
A local court here on Monday acquitted Kuldeep Singh, a native of Barnala and resident of Philippines, in a 10-year-old murder case of Ramanpreet Kaur, 22.
Kaur, who was staying at a paying guest (PG) accommodation in Sector 22, Chandigarh, was strangulated to death on June 10, 2006. Her body was found near Sector 26-27 road.
According to the case, both Ramanpreet and Kuldeep, who were neighbours in Barnala, were in love with each other and they were about to get married on November 18, 2005. But Ramanpreet refused to marry due to some differences between them.
Both, Ramanpreet and Kuldeep, then married elsewhere. The girl’s marriage could not work out and she came back to her parents’ home. She started preparing for IELTS in Chandigarh and was living in a PG, Sector 22.
According to the police, when Kuldeep came to know about her failed marriage, he contacted her mother Amarjeet Kaur for meeting Ramanpreet. After persisting her for some time, she agreed, and both Kuldeep and Ramanpreet met in her presence in Chandigarh.
According to Amarjeet’s statement, Kuldeep offered to marry Ramanpreet but she refused. He allegedly told her that he would leave his wife and would marry her but she did not agree. After that Amarjeet, as she claimed, left and Kuldeep allegedly offered to drop Ramanpreet at her PG. The same evening her body was recovered. The family came to know about it after more than 10 days.
Kuldeep had then left for Philippines and finally, in 2014, he surrendered as his counsel claimed.
The police built the case on the basis of mobile tower locations, statement of Amarjeet Kaur and tyre marks of his car near the crime spot. But the court acquitted Kuldeep for lack of evidence.
“The statement of Amarjeet was riddled with lies. The mobile phone that was being claimed to be used by Kuldeep was not in his name. The police could not produce the real owner. Also, the call records showed it was Amarjeet who was making calls. There was discrepancy in the statements of policemen regarding lifting of evidence of marks of tyres. The mould of tyre marks was never produced before the court,” said AS Sukhija, counsel for Kuldeep.
He added, “Kuldeep was never in love with Ramanpreet.”“It is a great setback for us. We fought for the last 10 years but got nothing,” expressed Amarjeet.
Her counsel Abhishek Singh Rana said, “We will study the judgment and if required we will file an appeal in the high court.”