Three points that went against PandherFebruary 13th, 2009 - 11:17 pm ICT by IANS
Ghaziabad, Feb 13 (IANS) While the court had enough evidence against Surinder Koli to convict and sentence him for the rape and murder of 14-year-old Rimpa Haldar, it relied on three major points to nail businessman Moninder Singh Pandher for the crime.
The first was how did the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) let off Pandher on the basis of an alibi by just showing the immigration stamp on his passport as proof that he was not in the country when Rimpa was murdered.
The CBI exonerated Pandher by simply relying on the seals of immigration officers of Australia and New Delhi on his passport. In the absence of air tickets, Pandher’s visit to Australia in February 2005 could not be corroborated, said the victims’ lawyer Khalid Khan.
The CBI further said that Rimpa Halder (14) went missing Feb 8, 2005, but the case of her abduction and murder was registered July 20 that year, five months later. The exact date of her murder could not be established.
The Noida police on Dec 29, 2006, had admitted that at the time of recovery of the clothes of Rachna, another victim, Pandher and Koli signed the memo which affirmed their presence, but the CBI ignored this fact.
Manish Kumbat, a doctor, in his report stated that the weapon used in the murder was a saw and not a pointed weapon, but the CBI ignored this, Khan told the court.
Khan argued that the CBI had committed deliberate lapses in the charge sheet since the investigating agency wanted to let off Pandher, and for that purpose the CBI submitted a charge sheet only against Surinder Koli, his manservant.
Even the Noida police connived with the CBI to let off Pandher, Khan alleged.
To prove his point, Khan requested the court to summon the case diary maintained by the Noida police in the early stages of the case before it was handed over to the CBI. But the probe agency did not present the case diary along with the charge sheet.
In the case diary, the Noida police had stated before the chief judicial magistrate’s court in Noida that the saw was recovered from both the accused - Koli and Pandher. The CBI presented no reference of this fact in its charge sheet before the court.
Khan requested the court to summon the then circle officer of Uttar Pradesh Police Dinesh Yadav, who was posted at Noida. The official admitted he erred in mentioning “accused persons” instead of the “accused person”.