'Why NIA not banking upon DP's sketch of alleged bomb planter' | delhi | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
May 29, 2017-Monday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

'Why NIA not banking upon DP's sketch of alleged bomb planter'

The National Investigation Agency today came in for sharp criticism by a court in New Delhi for "not banking" upon the city police sketch of the person, who allegedly planted a suitcase bomb at the Delhi high court, made on the basis of an injured witness' account.

delhi Updated: Sep 04, 2012 20:55 IST

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) on Tuesday came in for sharp criticism by a court in New Delhi for "not banking" upon the city police sketch of the person, who allegedly planted a suitcase bomb at the Delhi high court, made on the basis of an injured witness' account.

The court observed that though the person who had kept the briefcase at the high court's reception at its gate number five must have escaped but it's not clear as to why the NIA is not banking upon the details provided by the Delhi police.

"It has been vehemently argued that after this occurrence, the investigation had been initially conducted by the local police and an injured eye witness had come forward to claim that he had seen the person planting a brief case. It is not the case of the prosecution that the identity of some person killed or injured had not established.

"Therefore, it can be said that the person who had kept the brief case must have escaped. Why the NIA is not banking upon the sketch prepared by the police on the basis of description supplied to them (police) by that injured witness?," asked district judge HS Sharma.

The remarks were made by the court, while ordering the framing of charges against Wasim Akram Malik who was arrested for his alleged role in the September 7, 2011 terror attack at the reception of the Delhi High Court here in which 15 persons were killed and 79 were injured.

The court ordered framing of charges against Malik under various provisions of the IPC, the Explosive Substance Act and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act after finding prima facie evidence against him.