Drugs Controller General Of India: Sit Missed Slr-toting Protester: Cops Injured In Kotkapura Firing | Chandigarh News
Bathinda: Four cops who were injured in a clash with the protesters at Kotkapura on October 14, 2015, have objected why all the special investigation teams (SIT) constituted in these 9 years omitted a vital point from all the four charge sheets — that one of the agitators carried a self-loading rifle (SLR) suspected to have been snatched from police and how a bullet fired straight from it had thrown injured protester Ajit Singh to the right side of the crowd.
The four cops include the-then station house officer (SHO) of Kotkapura, Gurdeep Singh Pandher, who was suspended after the incident. Along with cops Rashpal Singh, Bhalla Singh, and Angrej Singh, he has filed multiple court applications for impartial investigation. In a separate application based on an SIT-added video clip, they have marked several protesters who are seen running with the SLRs.
Pandher was first to move this application on September 10, while the other three joined later. The applications were to be taken up on Saturday when the hearing was adjourned to October 7. Pandher told TOI that: “A senior member of the previous SIT victimised me and even the present SIT overlooked the evidence that we had pointed out. While the SIT’s charge sheet mentions that the protesters had snatched two SLRs from police and one of the video clips from the spot captured one of those guns in the hands of an agitator, the SIT didn’t didn’t use that evidence or investigate how a bullet fired from that weapon could have thrown Ajit Singh to the right side, while the protesters were moving in forward.”
He will file a complaint against the aforementioned senior member of the previous SIT and tag the material evidence with it. Countering his allegations, police have started testing the theory that the bullet that hit Ajit Singh was from an AK-47, not an SLR. Calling it an attempt to delay justice, the four cops are ready to file an application against it.
Pandher’s counsel Amit Kumar told TOI that the bullet retrieved from Ajit Singh had deformed with time to a point where it could not be said for definite that it was from an AK-47. Also, the SIT should have identified the owner of the AK-47. Confronted, SIT member and Bathinda senior superintendent of police (SSP) Gulneet Singh Khurana said that: “The investigations continue, so the Punjab and Haryana high court’s directions forbid us from talking to the media.”
The four cops include the-then station house officer (SHO) of Kotkapura, Gurdeep Singh Pandher, who was suspended after the incident. Along with cops Rashpal Singh, Bhalla Singh, and Angrej Singh, he has filed multiple court applications for impartial investigation. In a separate application based on an SIT-added video clip, they have marked several protesters who are seen running with the SLRs.
Pandher was first to move this application on September 10, while the other three joined later. The applications were to be taken up on Saturday when the hearing was adjourned to October 7. Pandher told TOI that: “A senior member of the previous SIT victimised me and even the present SIT overlooked the evidence that we had pointed out. While the SIT’s charge sheet mentions that the protesters had snatched two SLRs from police and one of the video clips from the spot captured one of those guns in the hands of an agitator, the SIT didn’t didn’t use that evidence or investigate how a bullet fired from that weapon could have thrown Ajit Singh to the right side, while the protesters were moving in forward.”
He will file a complaint against the aforementioned senior member of the previous SIT and tag the material evidence with it. Countering his allegations, police have started testing the theory that the bullet that hit Ajit Singh was from an AK-47, not an SLR. Calling it an attempt to delay justice, the four cops are ready to file an application against it.
Pandher’s counsel Amit Kumar told TOI that the bullet retrieved from Ajit Singh had deformed with time to a point where it could not be said for definite that it was from an AK-47. Also, the SIT should have identified the owner of the AK-47. Confronted, SIT member and Bathinda senior superintendent of police (SSP) Gulneet Singh Khurana said that: “The investigations continue, so the Punjab and Haryana high court’s directions forbid us from talking to the media.”
