Gurugram school murder case: Bail plea of 16-year-old accused rejected
The Punjab and Haryana high court rejected the bail petition of the 16-year-old boy accused of slitting the throat of a Class 2 student of the private school in Gurugram in September last year.Updated: Jun 07, 2018 17:37 IST
The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday rejected the bail petition of the 16-year-old boy accused of slitting the throat of a Class-2 student of the private school in Gurugram in September last year, the lawyer representing the victim’s family said.
Sushil Tekriwal, who is representing the victim’s family, said the bench of justice Daya Chaudhary rejected the bail petition of the accused.
“The high court judgment rejecting the bail of juvenile today vindicates our consistent contention that the hyper-technical point of 60 days chargesheet by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the murder case cannot sustain. This judgment is also one step forward toward final justice,” Tekriwal said.
The victim’s father said the boy would have been a threat to the society if he was granted bail.
The father of the accused, who attended the court proceedings, broke down after hearing the order.
The accused filed the bail application on the grounds that the investigation in the matter was not completed within the prescribed period.
“CBI exceeded their time period for filing the chargesheet and it was not submitted within the time period of 60 days. They submitted the chargesheet after 90 days,” his lawyer Sandeep Aneja said.
The probe agency’s lawyer Sumeet Goel argued against the bail petition and reiterated its stand that the accused’s search history on his mobile phone before and after the murder throws light on his conduct before the crime, his intention to commit it and his behaviour after the incident to avoid arrest.
The agency had filed a 15-page reply in the court earlier on April 5 against his bail, saying the juvenile searched and downloaded information about poisoning, various poisons, their effects and their sources in August and September 2017.
The father of the accused said they will see the order and then decide their next course of action. He had filed a petition in the high court on February 16 for his son’s bail and that he should not be tried as an adult in the case.
A Gurugram special children’s court had on May 21 upheld the Juvenile Justice Board’s (JJB) December order and adjudged that the accused should be tried as an adult. The board dismissed his bail plea on December 15 last year and the special children’s court dismissed the application on January 8.
The investigating agency has said the juvenile should not be granted a bail as its probe in the case is still pending and is at a crucial stage with witnesses yet to be examined. It has argued that he may tamper with evidence and intimidate or influence the witnesses.
He may even abscond which would hamper the course of the investigation, it added.