Apex court questions bail for murder suspects

May 27th, 2009 - 10:14 pm ICT by IANS  

New Delhi, May 27 (IANS) The Supreme Court Wednesday sought the Uttar Pradesh government’s response to the grant of bail to the alleged killers a top official of the Indian arm of Italian business firm Graziano Transmissioni.
A vacation bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Deepak Verma issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh government on a lawsuit by the Greater Noida-headquartered firm, challenging the grant of bail to the six accused persons involved in killing the CEO, Lalit Kishore Chaudhary.

Chaudhary had been bludgeoned to death Sep 22 last year by a 200-strong mob of dismissed workers which had barged into the company premises and indulged in large-scale violence.

The violence had resulted in injuries to around 40 executives and workers of the firm. The dismissed workers were demanding they be reinstated.

While seeking the state government’s explanation as to why the bail granted to the six accused persons should not be cancelled, the apex court bench, however, refused to stay the Allahabad High Court order for the bail.

The six accused, who were granted bail May 19, are Kailash Chand, Jaswant Singh, Pankesh Kumar, Jogendra Singh, Rajendra and Komal Singh.

Challenging the grant of bail by the high court to the six, the company contended that bail should not have been granted when the accused have been charged with heinous offences punishable with death or life imprisonment.

Appearing for Graziano, senior counsel Siddharth Luthra argued that the high court had erred in freeing the accused on bail as the seriousness of their offences that included murder cannot be ignored.

He also criticised the high court order, saying that it granted bail despite apprehensions that the accused might tamper with evidence and try to influence witnesses after their release.

Luthra also argued that after their release, the six accused would also instigate other workers of the firm to resort to agitation.

He said the high court had ignored the fact that the accused in order to pressurise the management to concede their demands had taken started rioting and brutally killing the CEO while injuring 40 others.

Related Stories

    Posted in Uncategorized |