Delhi HC declines to consider CBI probe into biker Sahil Dhaneshra’s death

Sahil Dhaneshra died on February 3 near Dwarka’s Sector 11 after the SUV, driven by a 17-year-old, attempted an overtaking manoeuvre and collided head-on into his bike

The Delhi High Court on Monday declined to accept a plea by the mother of 23-year-old biker Sahil Dhaneshra to transfer the investigation into her son’s death to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), observing that there was no material on record to warrant such a direction.

Inna Makan, mother of 23-year-old Sahil Dhaneshra who died after an SUV driven allegedly by a minor collided with his motorcycle, mourns, in New Delhi (PTI)

Dhaneshra died on February 3 near Sector 11 in Dwarka after the Mahindra Scorpio, driven by a 17-year-old, attempted an overtaking manoeuvre and rammed head-on into his bike.

Sahil’s mother, Inna Makkan, had approached the high court to seek transfer of the case to the CBI or have the probe monitored by a senior police officer, alleging there was “grave negligence” and “haste” in the investigation being carried out by the Delhi Police.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed that a transfer of investigation was not a “matter of right” and required “sufficient material” on record to warrant such a direction. But the petition, the court noted, was general in nature and did not specify the names of police officers concerned or provide concrete evidence of a “lackadaisical approach” by the Investigating Officer (IO).

The high court also noted that the woman could directly approach trial court to address her grievances.

“You’re coming to me to transfer from this (agency) to this, and for me, transfer is done when there is some grievance… This is not maintainable. Transfer is not a matter of right but is only done if there is material of the nature that calls for transfer. Here, there is nothing,” justice Banerjee told lawyers Pavan Narang and Aman Singh Bakshi, who appeared for the mother.

“Your case is that the Delhi police is not conducting a free and fair investigation? Show me from your pleading where you have referred… whose names… This is a very general petition. Where is the allegation against them? I am not convinced… what is the IO’s lackadaisical approach? Nothing,” the bench said.

In view of the court’s observations, the mother chose to withdraw the petition.

“The counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw the petition. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek a remedy in accordance with the law. The counsel for the Delhi police says that the Delhi police is always there to offer their services of any nature if and when required,” the court said in the order.

The minor, who was driving the car, did not possess a driver’s licence, was apprehended and sent to an observation home.

Police registered a case under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) dealing with rash and negligent driving, causing death by negligence, and endangering human life. The boy initially claimed he was an adult but the police later found he was a minor.

The SUV is owned by his 47-year-old father. He has also been charge-sheeted under section 180 (allowing unauthorised persons to drive vehicles) and 199A (offences by juveniles) of the Motor Vehicles Act (MVA).

The chargesheet, filed on February 14, said, “The CCTV footage (of the crash) clearly depicts the offender’s vehicle being driven in an improper, reckless, and high-speed manner.”

In March, the JJB granted bail to the minor, observing that justice will still be served if the accused is released. Principal magistrate Chitranshi Arora, in a 16-page order, noted that inadequate parental supervision had contributed to the incident.

In her petition, Inna submitted that neither the accused’s father nor his sister had been arrayed as accused, despite multiple police statements to that effect. It was also asserted that the Investigating Officer (IO) has made no arrests.