{"id":35536,"date":"2018-01-08T16:04:01","date_gmt":"2018-01-08T10:34:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/apnlive.com\/?p=35536"},"modified":"2018-01-08T16:05:14","modified_gmt":"2018-01-08T10:35:14","slug":"pradyuman-murder-case-court-denies-bail-to-16-year-old-prime-accused","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/apnlive.com\/india-news\/pradyuman-murder-case-court-denies-bail-to-16-year-old-prime-accused\/","title":{"rendered":"Pradyuman murder case: Court denies bail to 16-year-old prime accused"},"content":{"rendered":"

Earlier on Saturday, Additional Sessions Judge Jasbir Singh Kundu had reserved the order after hearing arguments of the counsel for the accused, the CBI and the complainant.<\/p>\n

The defense counsel argued that the charge sheet in relevance with the case was not filed within a month \u2013 violating the rules of the Juvenile Justice Act. The counsel further claimed that the required documents in the case were not provided to him.<\/p>\n

However, the CBI opposed the contention and claimed that the mandatory period for filing a charge sheet is 90 days \u2013 as prescribed by CrPC provisions. Stating that the \u201ccircumstances have changed\u201d since the Juvenile Justice Board declared the accused as an adult \u2013 the CBI\u2019s counsel argued that the charge sheet needed to be filed within three months.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, following a plea filed by Barun Thakur \u2013 Pradyuman\u2019s father \u2013 a Supreme Court bench, comprising of Justices RK Agarwal and Abhay Manohar Sapre, on Monday asked the Centre to submit all documents relating the anticipatory bail granted to the school officials. Barun Thakur\u2019s plea to the apex court challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court\u2019s January 19 directive, to grant anticipatory bail to the founders and officials of the Ryan International School \u2013 including founding members, Augustine Pinto, Grace Pinto and Ryan Pinto.<\/p>\n

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had earlier granted anticipatory bail to the Pintos as the CBI hasn\u2019t yet established any lapse or negligence on the part of the school\u2019s founders. Furthermore, the investigating agency hasn\u2019t presented any evidence to prove that the founders or officials of the schools have contributed to the crime or have criminally conspired in the case. However, the court has directed the founders to not leave the country and present themselves before the CBI, as and when they are summoned.<\/p>\n

The Pradyuman murder case <\/a>took a sensational turn after the CBI on November 8 detained a Class 11 student in connection with the murder of the 2nd grade student. The CBI had further stated that there was no evidence to support that the primarily accused bus conductor \u2013 Ashok Kumar \u2013 was involved in the murder.<\/p>\n

Continuing its probe, the premier investigative agency came to the conclusion that the Gurgaon police planted the murder weapon (a knife) on the primary accused \u2013 Ashok Kumar, the school bus conductor \u2013 to frame him and declare the case as closed. The central agency revealed that the murder weapon belongs to the 16-year-old student who was later accused of the murder.<\/p>\n

Earlier, the Gurgaon police had claimed that Ashok Kumar tried to sexually assault the Grade 2 student of the school and slit his throat when he resisted. According to the police, their primary allegations were purportedly based on CCTV footage \u2013 which suggested that Kumar left the school toilet at the same time when Pradyuman had been killed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"