Times of India: Nagpur: Tuesday, 20 August 2024.
The Ram Jhula accident case
controversy seems to be getting murkier with fresh allegations surfacing
against the investigation officer and his Tehsil police team.
In a fresh goof-up, the cops furnished a reply under Right to Information (RTI) Act stating that Ram Jhula case accused Ritika Maloo’s husband, Dinesh, was arrested and presented before court on day of the accident on February 25, instead of June 10.
In a press conference organised by social forum ‘Janta Foundation’ on Monday, activists Zeeshan Siddiqui, Piyush Gedam, Vikas Kunjam, and Mohd Shahrukh, flanked by relatives of the two victims, Mohd Atif and Mohd Hussain Mustafa, highlighted the mockery of RTI Act by Tehsil police.
The police station not only furnished a wrong date of Dinesh’s arrest, but also tried to mislead the applicant by furnishing the FIR copy and complaint copy repeatedly in its ‘18-page’ reply, justifying compliance with law.
Zeeshan said, CP Ravinder Singal did not remove PSI Parshuram Bhaval from Tehsil police station or acted against investigation officer Sandeep Buwa, who’s responsible for omissions in the case.
“PSI Bhaval complicated the case. It was his negligence which led to the destruction of evidence and invoking of bailable section in the case. In the RTI reply, there are two versions of Buwa on Bhaval. At one place, Buwa stated under RTI the inquiry against Bhaval was underway, while at another place he revealed the report against PSI was sent to seniors for action,” said Siddiqui.
In a fresh goof-up, the cops furnished a reply under Right to Information (RTI) Act stating that Ram Jhula case accused Ritika Maloo’s husband, Dinesh, was arrested and presented before court on day of the accident on February 25, instead of June 10.
In a press conference organised by social forum ‘Janta Foundation’ on Monday, activists Zeeshan Siddiqui, Piyush Gedam, Vikas Kunjam, and Mohd Shahrukh, flanked by relatives of the two victims, Mohd Atif and Mohd Hussain Mustafa, highlighted the mockery of RTI Act by Tehsil police.
The police station not only furnished a wrong date of Dinesh’s arrest, but also tried to mislead the applicant by furnishing the FIR copy and complaint copy repeatedly in its ‘18-page’ reply, justifying compliance with law.
Zeeshan said, CP Ravinder Singal did not remove PSI Parshuram Bhaval from Tehsil police station or acted against investigation officer Sandeep Buwa, who’s responsible for omissions in the case.
“PSI Bhaval complicated the case. It was his negligence which led to the destruction of evidence and invoking of bailable section in the case. In the RTI reply, there are two versions of Buwa on Bhaval. At one place, Buwa stated under RTI the inquiry against Bhaval was underway, while at another place he revealed the report against PSI was sent to seniors for action,” said Siddiqui.
.JPG)
.JPG)
