A Delhi court docket Saturday prolonged by 4 days the police custody of Olympic wrestling medallist Sushil Kumar and Ajay Kumar Sehrawat, arrested in reference to the homicide of a 23-year-old grappler, saying that nobody is above the legislation.
Sushil Kumar and his associates allegedly assaulted Sagar Dhankar and two of his buddies at Delhi’s Chhatrasal Stadium. Sagar succumbed to accidents later.
Following Sushil and Ajay Kumar’s arrest, the court docket had remanded them in six days police custody on Might 23.
On being produced earlier than the court docket on the finish of the remand interval Saturday, the Delhi Police moved an software in search of extension of custody by seven extra days, stating that Sushil Kumar was the mastermind and a number of other recoveries are but to be made for which his interrogation is required.
Permitting their interrogation for under 4 days, Metropolitan Justice of the Peace Mayank Goel mentioned, “Nobody is above legislation and legislation treats everybody equally.
Although the Structure ensures the correct to life and liberty to all individuals whether or not they’re accused or not, however that proper can also be topic to sure exceptions.”
The allegations towards the accused individuals are very grave and severe in nature, the court docket mentioned, emphasising on the significance of the preliminary days of investigation to unearth the reality.
The choose mentioned the involvement of a lot of individuals, a few of whom belong to some infamous gangs stationed in and out of doors Delhi, can also be suspected and they’re but to be arrested.
“Furthermore, sure recoveries i.e. cell phone and garments of accused individuals are but to be made. As such within the curiosity of justice I deem it applicable to permit the appliance of 10 to the extent of 4 days solely,” the choose said within the order.
Throughout the course of the proceedings, Further Public Prosecutor Ashish Kajal sought Sushil and Ajay’s custody to confront them with different arrested co-accused, and recuperate cell phones, garments the Olympian was carrying in the course of the brawl, and DVR of the CCTV cameras put in at his home.
Additional, the prosecutor, representing the Delhi Police, mentioned that the investigating company seized seven autos from the spot which have been used within the fee of the crime however solely 4 autos have been linked as a consequence of evasive and non-cooperation of Sushil and Ajay Kumar.
He mentioned their custody is required to hyperlink the remaining three autos with their customers, apprehend different accused, determine their hideouts at Haridwar, Rishikesh and Ghaziabad and apprehend the individuals who offered them assist to evade arrest.
The worldwide wrestler was arrested, together with co-accused Ajay Kumar, on Might 23 from outer Delhi’s Mundka space. They have been evading arrest and had been on the run for practically three weeks after the brawl.
In the meantime, advocate Pradeep Rana, who represented Sushil Kumar, opposed the extension of police custody and mentioned that the investigating company has already recovered materials proof within the case and nothing extra is to be recovered.
Rana additional said that the investigating company is making an attempt to veil their failure in finishing the investigation by alleging that the accused individuals usually are not cooperating.
He additionally accused the police of leaking selective info to the media to create a prejudice towards Sushil Kumar.
“I’m not saying the media shouldn’t be allowed. I’m saying selective leak shouldn’t be allowed,” he mentioned.
The Delhi Police filed an FIR within the case below sections 302 (homicide), 308 (culpable murder), 365 (kidnapping), 325 (inflicting grievous harm), 323 (voluntarily inflicting harm), 341 (wrongful restraint) and 506 (felony intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
It was additionally registered below sections 188 (Disobedience to order by public servant), 269 (negligent act more likely to unfold an infection of illness), 120-B (felony conspiracy) and 34 (frequent intention) of the IPC and numerous sections below the Arms Act.