Junaid lynching: Haryana eats its words on kin seeking Rs 2 cr; father claims it’s bid to malign their image
The government had made the claim in this regard on Thursday before a high court bench during the hearing of petition filed by Jalaludin who had sought CBI probe into his son’s murder.india Updated: Nov 08, 2017 19:24 IST
The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday sought response from the Haryana government on an application moved by the father of Junaid Khan, who was lynched to death by a mob suspecting him of being a “beef eater” aboard a Mathura-bound train in Faridabad district on June 22 this year.
The response was sought after Junaid’s father Jalaludin told the court that the government’s claims that he was ready to compromise with the accused in lieu of Rs 2 crore and 3 acres of land were “false and baseless and it was an attempt to malign his image”.
The government had made the claim in this regard on Thursday before a high court bench during the hearing of petition filed by Jalaludin who had sought CBI probe into his son’s murder.
The allegation is in gross defamation of the family, the petitioner said, adding it is clear from the allegations there was “mala fide intent” on part of the government. The purported panchayats on compromise were held illegally. The petitioner did not participate in them despite pressure, he has stated adding that government be asked as to how these panchayats were held in a local government schools.
No mention of ‘compromise’ in govt affidavit
On the other hand the formal reply submitted by Haryana government does not find any mention of state’s claims that family demanded Rs 2 crore for settlement.
The reply was submitted by Mohinder Singh, deputy superintendent of police (DSP railways), Faridabad. He has submitted that probe was conducted in an impartial manner and accused have been arrested and some of them booked for murder charges.
The challan too has been filed and the trial court has already framed charges. The petition is not maintenable as investigation has concluded. Singh has stated alleging that petition was filed to “prolong the trial”.
He also submitted that the petitioner did not raise issues with regard to investigation at the time of filing of challan and framing of charges. The government has also claimed that the fight took place for the seat and during altercation some derogatory words were uttered by the accused persons about victim’s religion.
“There was no pre-planning or conspiracy on the part of the accused persons,” the state has claimed referring to its investigation. The matter would be taken up on Wednesday by high court.