Ghaziabad student death: Parents, school to contest chargesheet
he Ghaziabad police on February 9 filed a chargesheet at Ghaziabad court against five school officials — the school principal Dr Kavita Sharma, school chairman Ankur Malhotra, his wife Smita Malhotra, school director Joginder Dua and another official Deepak Tuteja.noida Updated: Feb 16, 2018 22:17 IST
The parents of class 4 student Arman Sehgal, who collapsed on the premises of GD Goenka School in Indirapuram in August 2017 and died, on Friday said that they are not satisfied with the sections under which the Ghaziabad police have filed the chargesheet against five members of the school’s management.
On August 1, 2017, Arman Sehgal was found collapsed on the second-floor corridor outside his classroom and was declared dead after he was rushed to a nearby hospital. In a major relief to the Sehgals, the Allahabad high court on Friday dismissed the petition filed by the five officials of the school, who sought to get the case against them quashed.
The school officials had filed a petition for quashing the FIR lodged by the Sehgals against them under sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 201 (destruction of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code at Indirapuram police station. The FIR was filed after Arman’s death.
“The police have filed the chargesheet against five school officials and they have submitted the document to the high court on Friday as well. Instead of the IPC Section 304 lodged in the FIR, the police have charged the five accused under Section 304a (causing death by negligence) of the IPC in the chargesheet. We are not satisfied with the investigation and this section is not acceptable to us,” Swati Sehgal, Arman’s mother, said.
The Ghaziabad police on February 9 filed a chargesheet at Ghaziabad court against five school officials — the school principal Dr Kavita Sharma, school chairman Ankur Malhotra, his wife Smita Malhotra, school director Joginder Dua and another official Deepak Tuteja.
The police filed the chargesheet on February 9 under sections 304a and 201 of the IPC and also submitted a list of 21 witnesses in the case along with the name of five school officials.
“Since Section 304a of the IPC is a lenient section, we will contest the chargesheet filed by the police. The original section of 304 of the IPC, as mentioned in our FIR, is not levied in the chargesheet,” Sushmita Mukherjee, the lawyer representing Sehgals, said.
Speaking to Hindustan Times on February 15, school chairman Ankur Malhotra had expressed his surprise at the chargesheet and denied that the police had informed him about filing a chargesheet.
He had said that the school authorities will contest the chargesheet as, according to them, there is no case to be made against the school authorities. Malhotra could not be contacted on Friday as his mobile phone remained switched off.
“The high court has dismissed our petition. We have several objections to the chargesheet and will contest it. We will go for the legal remedy against the chargesheet filed against my clients,” Gopal Chaturvedi, the lawyer representing school authorities at Allahabad, said.
The high court’s order on Friday brought some relief to the Sehgals but both the parties, including the school officials, are bent on contesting the chargesheet.
“It is stated that the investigating agency has completed the entire investigation and a police report as per provisions of section 173 CrPC has already been filed before the competent court. In view of it, nothing survives in this petition for the writ and the same is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. The writ petition stands dismissed as having been rendered infructuous,” the high court stated in its February 16 order.
First Published: Feb 16, 2018 22:17 IST