E-Paper
2019 property dealer murder in Chandigarh: Hearsay claims, no call trail behind Bishnoi’s acquittal
The court of additional sessions judge Ashwani Kumar noted that while Bishnoi was named in the chargesheet as a conspirator, the complainant’s claim about his involvement was based on hearsay
Court finds no direct link between shooters and the jailed gangster, who was accused of conspiring the murder.
The local court that sentenced three men to life imprisonment for the 2019 murder of property dealer Sonu Shah in Burail found no evidence linking gangster Lawrence Bishnoi to the shooters, leading to his acquittal.
In the detailed judgment released on Saturday, the court of additional sessions judge Ashwani Kumar noted that while Bishnoi was named in the chargesheet as a conspirator, the complainant’s claim about his involvement was based on hearsay.
The prosecution failed to produce any call records, financial trail, recovery, witness testimony or any direct proof of telephonic instructions allegedly issued by Bishnoi from jail directly linking him to the shooters who carried out the attack, the court observed.
The prosecution had contended that Bishnoi, who remains lodged in Gujarat’s Sabarmati Jail, hatched the conspiracy to commit Sonu Shah’s murder from behind the bars.
The statement of complainant Parveen Kumar, brother of Sonu Shah, regarding involvement of gangsters Lawrence Bishnoi and Sampat Nehra was termed “hearsay evidence” as Sonu had told him about his suspicion.
When Bishnoi was arrested in connection with this case, no mobile phone was recovered from him. Prosecution witness 23, inspector Ranjit Singh, who arrested Bishnoi, also stated that no connection was established between Bishnoi and the other accused either through mobile phone or otherwise.
Jignesh S Chawla, the deputy superintendent at Sabarmati Jail, was also examined as defence witness 1 and specifically stated that Bishnoi, who was examined as defence witness 2, was in jail at the time of the alleged offence and never used a communication device during his jail tenure.
“In the absence of any evidence, it cannot be said that the accused had telephonic conversation with each other particularly when no evidence has been collected that the accused had used any communication device while lodged in jail. Thus, the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of accused Lawrence Bishnoi beyond shadow of reasonable doubt,” the court said while letting him off.
The property dealer, Rajveer, alias Sonu Shah, was at his office when four assailants had stormed in and fired 10 shots, killing him on the spot. Two others, Joginder Phelwan and Rommy, were also injured in the firing
Charges were framed against a total of eight accused — Lawrence Bishnoi, Shubham Prajapati, Manjit, Rajan, Dharminder Singh, Abhishek, Raju Basodi and Deepak.
While the court found Shubham, Manjit and Rajan, alias Jaat, guilty of shooting Sonu Shah dead, it let off the remaining five accused after the prosecution failed to prove its case.
The prosecution had presented Dharminder as the link between the shooters and Bishnoi.
In his disclosure statement, Dharminder had allegedly revealed that he was in contact with Bishnoi telephonically and booked a hotel room for the three shooters to stay in before the murder. However, the court ruled this out, owing to discrepancies in the hotel register.
The court also observed that a disclosure statement did not constitute as substantive evidence unless it led to the recovery of a fact or object connected to the crime. In Bishnoi’s case, the court noted that nothing was recovered after the disclosure statement.
