Shraddha Walkar murder: HC fines lawyer for attention-seeking plea for CBI probe

The high court fined Joshini Tuli, the petitioner, ₹10,000 saying the plea is nothing but an attempt to “bask in the sunlight of the media attention”

There is nothing to show lapses on part of the Delhi Police in investigating the murder of Shraddha Walkar, whose partner Aaftab Poonawala allegedly killed her in May and hacked her body, the Delhi high court said while dismissing a lawyer’s plea seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the matter. It fined Joshini Tuli, the petitioner, ₹10,000 saying the plea is nothing but an attempt to “bask in the sunlight of the media attention”.

The Delhi high court. (PTI)

The court dismissed the plea on November 22, but a detailed reasoned order was uploaded later. The petitioner sought transfer of the investigation to the CBI claiming the police did not preserve “forensic evidence”.

“Apart from making vague allegations that the investigation is not being conducted in a proper manner, there is nothing in the writ petition to demonstrate deficiencies in the nature and quality of investigation,” said a bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad.

“Solely by stating that the investigation is faulty and that only 44% of the cases of murder result in conviction do not mean that every case must be transferred to the CBI.”

The high court called the allegations “unfortunate” and said that such types of petitions only affect the morale of the police and must not be encouraged. “Baseless allegations are bound to taint the faith the general public has in the criminal justice system. Delhi Police is a professional unit and to boost their morale, petitions of this nature must be severely deprecated.”

It said the police have submitted that the investigation is 80% complete and that a team of about 200 police personnel is involved in the probe and searching for missing parts of Walkar’s body.

The court expressed anguish over the misuse of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) jurisdiction. It added petitions are filed with oblique motives and only to attract publicity. These pleas have to be nipped in the bud to ensure that the sanctity of PIL, the court said.