New twist to tandoor murder case

By Nirnimesh Kumar

NEW DELHI, AUG. 26.

Sushil Sharma, the prime accused in the sensational Naina Sahni tandoor murder case, has decided to move the Delhi High Court seeking direction to the lower court that the case be tried by the earlier judge only.

Sushil Sharma, husband of Naina Sahni, is facing trial for allegedly killing his wife in his rented house at Gole Market in New Delhi and later trying to dispose of the body in Bagiya Restaurant at Ashok Yatri Niwas Hotel.

After a major reshuffle in the lower judiciary earlier this month, the case has been transferred to the court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Mr. V.K. Jain.

Earlier, it was being heard by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mr. G.P. Thareja, who has been transferred to the Tis Hazari courts as Additional District Judge.

On August 24, Mr. K.K. Sud, amicus curae for Sushil Sharma, appeared before the court and told Mr. Jain that he was moving an application for allowing Mr. Thareja to continue to try the case.

Mr. Sud sought time to move the application. The Judge allowed his request and asked him to approach the appropriate court by August 29, the next date of the hearing.

When, during the consideration of the request, the Judge enquired about the court where the appeal against the transfer of the case would lie, Mr. Sud said that the High Court would be the appropriate forum as the judges had been shifted by it.

Mr. Sud told the court that so far evidence of 86 prosecution witnesses had been recorded in the case. The evidence recording procedure is at the fag end as now only formal witnesses are to be examined. At the time of the transfer of the judge, statement of the investigating officer was being recorded.

Mr. Sud further said that Mr. Thareja would be the appropriate judge to appreciate evidence of the witnesses as he had observed their demeanour or misdemeanour during their examination in the court.

At this stage the new judge would not be able to appreciate the evidence on record. Hence, there was an apprehension of the same being prejudiced, Mr. Sud said.

The trial of the case has been in news on several occasions. Though the Supreme Court has directed the trial court to try the case on day-to-day basis, it has not been expeditious for various reasons.

The preceding judge had to pass orders several times seeking the co-operation of the Prosecution as well as the amicus curae for a speedy trial of the case.

At one time, one of the prosecution witnesses had to make an appeal to the trial court for an early completion of the recording of his statement as the same had been dragging on for several months.

Last month, the Special Public Prosecutor in the case moved an application under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code for summoning Prof. G.V. Rao of the CCMB, Hyderabad, as it was he who has conducted the DNA of the exhibits of the case.

The court has allowed his request and fixed August 29 as the date for recording of Dr. Rao's statement. The court has already examined Dr. Lalji Singh, Director of the DNA examination centre, in the matter.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Other States
Previous : Jharkhand State may have to tackle many scam cases
Next     : A right step towards wooing investors