New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Feb 28, 2020-Friday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

Home / Cities / Court dismisses plea by father of Dec 16 convict, seeking FIR against eyewitness

Court dismisses plea by father of Dec 16 convict, seeking FIR against eyewitness

cities Updated: Jan 27, 2020 23:55 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustantimes

New Delhi: A Delhi Court on Monday dismissed a plea by Hiralal Gupta, father of Pawan Kumar Gupta, one of the convicts in the December 16 gang rape case, seeking an FIR against the sole eyewitness for giving “motivated” statements and testimonies.

Additional sessions judge AK Jain said that the trial in the case has already completed and appeals up to the stage of Supreme Court have already been dismissed. He said the same ground has also been taken in the review petition, which has also been rejected.

“The complaint has been rightly dismissed by the trial court…..The acts of the complainant, who is father of convict Pawan Kumar Gupta appear desperate and malafide, however, when his son is one step away from gallows, no costs are required to be imposed,” the judge said while dismissing the plea.

The court’s order came on a plea by Hiralal, filed through advocate AP Singh, which had sought perjury proceedings against the sole eyewitness for giving “false and concocted information”, which had led to Pawan’s conviction.

The male friend was accompanying the 23-year-old paramedic when she was gang-raped on a moving bus on December 16, 2012, following which she succumbed to her injuries 10 days later at a hospital in Singapore.

The complaint said a series of 10 tweets by the former managing director of a private news channel had said the woman’s friend had taken bribes for interviews and debate appearances on television channels.

The plea contended that the witness had given “false facts” and “fabricated statements” to the police. It sought that summons be sent to the man for providing a “baseless and concocted story”. It also sought that directions be issued to the police to register a case against the man for “hatching a well-planned conspiracy against innocent people”, leading to their conviction and causing widespread public anger.

Countering the allegations, advocate Jitendra Jha, for the 23-year-old paramedical student, had contended that his client was running from pillar to post to get justice and that the convicts were using delaying tactics to further push back the execution.