Sunanda Pushkar case: Delhi High Court questions delay in probe
A bench of Justice GS Sistani and Justice Chander Shekhar said that though the police had collected evidence in February 2015, it was yet to get the final result of the electronic evidence they seized, including that of the close friends of Tharoor and Pushkar.delhi Updated: Aug 01, 2017 23:13 IST
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday questioned the police over the delay in probing the reasons behind the death of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor’s wife Sunanda Pushkar.
A bench of Justice GS Sistani and Justice Chander Shekhar said that though the police had collected evidence in February 2015, it was yet to get the final result of the electronic evidence they seized, including that of the close friends of Tharoor and Pushkar.
“This is something that happened in February 2015. Why has the police not been able to get the final result even after two years?” the bench asked.
“Here is somebody who passed away back in 2014 and you (police) initially said it was a case of suicide, but later it turned out to be one of homicide,” the bench said adding, “We are also concerned as to who is the real culprit”.
The court was hearing a petition filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy who is seeking a court-monitored CBI-led special investigation (SIT) probe into Pushkar’s death.
Tharoor’s stepson Shiv Menon wants to be made a party in the case.
Senior advocate Vikas Pahwa, appearing for Menon, also questioned Swamy’s locus in seeking such a probe. He alleged Swamy was doing it for publicity.
Swamy said he was trying to stop the police from covering up the investigation. He said Pushkar’s son is not interested in knowing the reason behind his mother’s death and only interested in her property in Canada.
“He (Menon) was in jail in Dubai in connection with a narcotics case. Tharoor got him out,” Swamy claimed.
The bench was not convinced with the police’s submission with regard to the difference of opinion in the findings of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) and the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL).
The court expressed its displeasure over the contention in the status report that data from some of the mobile phones, seized during investigation, had been deleted and the forensic laboratories had been unable to retrieve it.
The police, meanwhile, said approvals to send these devices to their manufacturers abroad for chip-level retrieval were being obtained from the authorities.
The court, however, directed the police to file an additional affidavit with regard to the probe into the matter and listed it for further hearing on August 30.