New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Sep 19, 2019-Thursday
-°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

Friday, Sep 20, 2019

Tabrez Ansari’s wife moves court against Jharkhand police

Parveen filed a petition in the court of chief judicial magistrate Manju Kumari in Seraikela. The petition has not been listed for hearing.

india Updated: Sep 12, 2019 05:38 IST
Bedanti Saran
Parveen filed a petition in the court of chief judicial magistrate Manju Kumari in Seraikela. The petition has not been listed for hearing.
Parveen filed a petition in the court of chief judicial magistrate Manju Kumari in Seraikela. The petition has not been listed for hearing.(HT image)
         

Sahista Parveen, the wife of alleged mob lynching victim Tabrez Ansari, filed a legal petition on Wednesday challenging Jharkhand Police’s decision to not press murder charges against 11 suspects even as the police defended its move to scale down the charges to culpable homicide.

Her announcement came a day after police filed a charge sheet against 11 accused under section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the IPC in Saraikela court, and not section 302 (murder). While section 302 attracts a maximum penalty of death, section 304 attracts a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.

Parveen filed a petition in the court of chief judicial magistrate Manju Kumari in Seraikela. The petition has not been listed for hearing.

“The mob intentionally killed my husband. He was mercilessly beaten up with rods and lathis, leading to blood clots in different parts of the body. The police and the doctors have not performed their jobs impartially,” she told reporters.

Parveen’s lawyer Altaf Hussain said, “We urged the court to take cognisance of offences under section 302 and not under section 304, as requested by the police. It is a clear case of murder but an attempt was made to dilute the charge against the accused.”

Twenty-four-year-old Ansari was caught by Dhatkidih villagers in the intervening night of June 17 and 18 while allegedly attempting burglary in a house along with two of his associates.

While his alleged aides managed to escape, Ansari got caught and thrashed. He was allegedly forced to chant Jais Shri Ram and Jai Hanuman. Villagers then handed him over to the police which took him to hospital. After primary treatment, he was produced in the court and sent to Seraikela jail the same day. He stayed in the medical ward of the hospital where he fell sick on June 22. He died in hospital on June 22.

Meanwhile on Wednesday, the police defended its decision to drop the murder charge. It pointed out that available evidence, doctors’ report and autopsy report indicated that it was not a pre-mediated murder.

“We have taken the decision to convert section 302 under the IPC to 304 of the code after consulting the authorities. The decision was taken based on proper probe and post-mortem and forensic reports, which said that Ansari died of cardiac arrest,” superintendent of police Karthik S said. Questioning the hue and cry over the police decision to drop murder charges, the SP said, “Why are people undermining section 304 of the IPC? The undermining of the section tantamount to undermining of the Indian Penal Code.”

Hussain said the court asked the state government for mandatory prosecution sanction, as required under section 295 A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious belief) of the IPC. “On Wednesday, it asked deputy commissioner to grant mandatory prosecution sanction against the accused as required for taking cognizance under section 295 A,” he added.

Ansari’s uncle, Masrul Aalam, who had testified in the case before the police, expressed dissatisfaction over the investigation.“We have filed a separate case in Jharkhand high court demanding a CBI [Central Bureau of Investigation] probe into the matter,” he said.

The case has raised temperatures in the region with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) calling the incident a “conspiracy of secularists”.

The post-mortem report pointed out that Ansari died due to cardiac arrest and that a haemorrhage in the head was not fatal. Seraikela-Kharsawan civil surgeon and superintendent of Seraikela Sadar Hospital (SSH) Dr Himanshu Bhusan Barwar had also confirmed that the forensic report of Ansari’s viscera ruled out death by poisoning.

(with agency inputs)

First Published: Sep 11, 2019 23:58 IST