Bathinda wedding dancer shooting: Accused back in jail as court rejects ‘accidental death’ theory
Lucky and a co-accused had attained bail on the argument that the challan had not been filed; and had also cited the reported move of the police to convert section 302 (murder) into 304A (accidental death, punishable by up to two years in jail).punjab Updated: Jul 05, 2017 09:51 IST
In an embarrassing turn of events for the Bathinda police in the case of a wedding dancer’s killing, a court in Talwandi Sabo has rejected the theory that celebratory firing caused the woman’s death “by accident”. With it came the re-arrest of the main accused, Lucky Kumar, in the court on Monday. He will now face trial on charges of culpable homicide, punishable by up to 10 years in jail, under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Dancer Kulwinder Kaur, nicknamed Janu, was shot dead on the spot while performing on stage as Lucky fired a shot in allegedly inebriated state at a wedding function in Maur last December.
Lucky and a co-accused had attained bail on the argument that the challan had not been filed; and had also cited the reported move of the police to convert section 302 (murder) into 304A (accidental death, punishable by up to two years in jail).
On Monday, judicial magistrate (Class 1) Gurdarshan Singh rejected the draft challan of the Maur town police to convert section 302 into 304A; and ordered the trial under section 304 instead. As the magistrate pronounced its order, Lucky left the court fearing arrest; but finally re-emerged to be arrested in the presence of his lawyers.
“The accused Lucky Kumar alias Billa had knowledge that, by his act, death is likely to be caused. Material on record shows that the act was done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death,” the court order stated.
It added, “(Another) Accused Sanjay Goyal abetted the offence by supplying the gun to his co-accused (Lucky).” The court, however, upheld the Bathinda district court’s one-week relief to Goyal for applying for a bail after the Monday’s verdict.
GOVT WINGS DIFFER
The court’s order came after the state prosecution led by public prosecutor Harpreet Singh opposed the police move towards section 304A in the court during heated arguments with the defence counsel in the court last month. The order had been kept reserved for Monday.
“Guns must be carried with a sense of responsibility and caution, and are not meant to be used in such places like marriage ceremony and, precisely for this reason, prohibition orders are made banning carrying of firearms in marriage ceremonies,” the court order also stated.