New Delhi [India]: Delhi’s Saket Court on Saturday adjourned the order on the framing of charges against Aftab Amin Poonawala accused in the Shraddha murder case till May 9.
The court was to pronounce charges against the accused but the concerned judge was on leave today. The Additional Sessions Judge Vishal Pahuja adjourned the matter till May 9 on Saturday.
On the last hearing on April 14, the court had reserved an order on charge.
The court had also sought a reply from Delhi police on an application moved by Shraddha’s father Vikas Walkar seeking the release of the bones of the deceased. He said that the bones should be exhibited soon so that he can perform the last rituals of Shraddha within one year of her death.
Advocate Akshay Bhandari had argued that the accused can’t be charged together for the main offence of murder and of the destruction of evidence. These two charges can be framed in alternate. This fact should be considered while framing of charge.
He also argued on the basis of the judgement of the superior court that the accused can’t be sentenced for the main offence and offence of destruction of evidence.
The accused can’t be charged for both offences together as it would prejudice his right, the counsel argued.
Advocate Seema Kushwaha had moved an application on behalf of Vikas Walkar, father of Shraddha for releasing the bones of the deceased.
He has also sought early exhibit of the bones so that the bones can be released to him to perform the last rites within one year of death. Delhi police will file a reply on the next date.
The owner of the property where the offence was committed had also approached the court seeking de-sealing of the said premises.
On April 3, the court took on record the copy of the judgement filed by the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad and Madhukar Pandey.
SPP Amit Prasad had submitted that there is a clear judgement that the charge under section 201 of IPC can be framed against the person who destroys the evidence to shield the main offender as well against the person who committed the main offence.
On the earlier date, the counsel for accused Aftab had argued that the charges of murder and disappearance of evidence can’t be framed jointly. These charges can be framed alternatively.
Advocate Akshay Bhandari had argued that either I (Aftab) can be charged with murder or for disappearing the evidence. The accused can not be charged for murder and disappearance of evidence under sections 302 and 201 of IPC together, the counsel argued. It can be framed alternatively.
He had argued that the accused can be charged with the offence of murder under 302 IPC or he could be framed for the offence of shielding the main offender under section 201 IPC.
Advocate Bhandari had argued that merely saying that “I (Aftab) am guilty of murder” is not sufficient. They have statements of eyewitnesses only. The Prosecution has to show the manner in which the crime was committed.
SPP Amit Prasad rebutted that the joint charges can be framed under section 201 for disappearing the evidence.
He had also submitted that the relied upon a chain of evidence, statement of witnesses, a record of past events and circumstances, forensic evidence, manner of offence etc were submitted before the court.
This matter is related to the alleged murder of Shraddha Walkar by his live-in partner Aftab Amin Poonawala on May 18, 2022.
Delhi police have concluded its arguements on a charge of murder and the disappearance of evidence against the accused.
