Yuva Sai Sagar

Online news channel!

Tag: jjb

Ryan accused back in juvenile home

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) in Gurugram on Wednesday sent a 16-year-old student of the Ryan International School to the juvenile home again for 14 days.The juvenile has been accused of murdering a seven-year-old student, Pradyuman Thakur, in the school premises on September 8. He was produced before the JJB after his custody ended on Wednesday. He was last produced before the board on November 11. He has since been put up at an observational home in Faridabad.Meanwhile, the juvenile’s father alleged that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) interrogated his son beyond the prescribed time.The board had fixed his interrogation for 10 am to 6 pm during a three-day remand that the agency got on November 8. Hearing on his plea is now scheduled for December 29, said a lawyer who attended the proceedings.The agency also sought permission to get his fingerprints but the matter has been posted for a later hearing. “There has been no decision on whether the juvenile should be tried as an adult,” Sushil Tekriwal, counsel of the victim’s father, Barun Chandra Thakur, said.On November 14, Thakur had filed a petition before the JJB, seeking that the 16-year-old accused be tried as an adult, stating that the crime he committed was “chilling, horrific, monstrous, and serious in nature”.”The juvenile should be treated as an adult as he knew what he was doing, his intention was to kill. He bought a knife a day before and also researched poisons on the internet. The statements recorded by the CBI officers indicate that he planned this murder to delay the exams and the parents-teachers meeting. The murder had a motive,” said Tekriwal.SCHOOL BUS CONDUCTOR RETURNS HOMEAshok Kumar, the school bus conductor arrested in connection with the Ryan murder case, was released on bail from the Bhondsi Jail on Wednesday evening. As the media persons thronged outside the Jail premises, the authorities as well as Kumar’s lawyers were quick to get him out from the back gate. His family members and other villagers were waiting for him at his home. Kumar’s lawyers claimed that he was not in a condition to speak to the media. He reached home around 9 pm and soon went to sleep. Kumar was granted bail on Tuesday under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which states that everyone has a right to personal liberty and life.

Accused’s kin slam CBI, say he was good at academics

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Adding a new twist into the Ryan International School murder case, family members and friends of the juvenile — accused of murdering the Class II student Pradyuman — rubbished the theory given by CBI officials and stated that he was a bright student. Not just this, he had received appreciation from this very Ryan International School where the crime took place. Earlier, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) maintained that the 16-year-old boy, accused of murdering Pradyuman, had done so in order to postpone exams and the upcoming parent-teacher meeting, as he was a poor studentAs the CBI began their first round of questioning after a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) allowed the CBI to question him for three days, the boy’s father also reached the JJB home when officials took him away.Investigation into the Pradyuman murder case has already raised many eyebrows. It may be recalled that earlier the Gurugram police had accused the bus conductor Ashok Kumar and arrested him claiming to have solved the murder. Now that the CBI has come up with a parallel line of investigation, questions are again being asked as to how do they justify their contention that the accused was a poor student.In fact, family members showed a report card of the accused where they said he had been given Grade ‘A’ in the emotional skills category, Grade ‘A’ in Attitudes and Values towards teachers, school mates, value system, schools programme and environment.In fact, the family says, the accused has been given A or B grade throughout Class X which doesn’t justify the CBI theory of him being poor in studies. Family members also debunked the theory of him being “mentally unstable” and “weak.”Relatives of the juvenile also revealed that the family had consulted a doctor on one occasion, as they thought he was not mature enough for his age, but otherwise they said he was a happy and a normal child.”My son can never kill anyone. He is innocent,” said the father of the child.”The boy was not only good in studies but also excelled in extra-curricular activities,” said a relative.It’s not just family, even friends of the accused are in shock. One of the accused’s close friends who would travel with him, said, “There was nothing wrong with him. I was sitting in the same section and we both gave the exam. He didn’t have blood on his clothes and was perfectly fine when we went home together.”

Mercedes hit-and-run case: Case to be heard by sessions court

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A Delhi court today transferred to a sessions court a case against the parents of a teenager who is accused of fatally running over a 32-year-old man while driving his father’s Mercedes last year. Metropolitan Magistrate Shefali Barnala Tandon committed the case to a sessions court for further proceedings after the counsel for the accused told the court that the copies of documents supplied to them along with the charge sheet were complete. The case file would be put up on May 20 before the district judge who would mark it to the court of an additional sessions judge. The court had earlier taken cognisance of the charge sheet filed by the Delhi Police against the teenager’s parents Manoj Aggarwal (53) and Indu Aggarwal (45) and driver Kapil Kumar Mishra (42), who is also an accused in the case. The police in its final report has claimed that the parents had “intentionally aided” the wrong act by allowing their son, who was a minor at the time of incident, to drive. Advocate Jinendra Jain, who represented the parents, had said no offence is made out against them and when the boy had no intention to kill the victim, where was the question of parents abetting the offence. He claimed that the teenager had tried to save the victim. A separate case against the teenager, who turned major four days after the April 4, 2016 accident, is going on before a sessions court here. The sessions court is at the stage of hearing arguments on framing of charges and on an appeal filed by the teenager challenging an order of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) holding that the boy would face trial as an adult. According to the police, the teenager had fatally run over victim Siddharth Sharma with his father’s Mercedes when the victim was trying to cross a road near Ludlow Castle School in north Delhi on April 4 last year. The vehicle was registered in the name of a company owned by his parents Manoj and Indu Aggarwal. The plea claimed that the teenager was a repeat offender and he had been driving the vehicle with the consent of his parents. By allowing their minor son to drive the car, they did an act with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death, it said. Regarding the mother, the police has said she had never questioned her son about driving the vehicle in a routine manner and she was equally liable for abetting the offence. The driver had earlier claimed that he was driving the Mercedes at the time of accident but had done a volte-face after he got to know that the victim was dead. Regarding the driver, the charge sheet has said he had intentionally given false information to the police to save the teenager from punishment. The charge sheet was filed against the three persons for allegedly abetting the offences of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, destruction of evidence and giving false information under the IPC and under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. Manoj Aggarwal and Mishra were arrested and later granted bail by the court. Indu Aggarwal was also granted anticipatory bail on April 27. The police had on May 26, 2016 chargesheeted the boy in JJB for culpable homicide not amounting to murder which entails a maximum of 10 years jail. The JJB had on June 4 last year ordered that the boy would face trial as an adult while observing that the offence allegedly committed by him was “heinous”. It is the first-of-its-kind case since the amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 which allowed the Board to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to the sessions court.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

Mercedes hit-and-run: Teenager’s parents aided act, says cops

<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Parents of a minor, accused of running over a 32-year-old man while driving his father’s Mercedes last year, had “intentionally aided” the wrong act by allowing their child to drive, Delhi Police has told a city court. Police made the allegation against the teenager’s parents in a charge sheet filed against them in the case. Metropolitan Magistrate Shefali Barnala Tandon, who had earlier taken cognisance of the charge sheet, today supplied the documents annexed with the final report to the teenager’s parents Manoj Aggarwal (53) and Indu Aggarwal (45) and driver Kapil Kumar Mishra (42), who is also an accused in the case. The court fixed May 22 for scrutiny of documents. Advocate Jinendra Jain, who represented the parents, said no offence is made out against them and when the boy had no intention to kill the victim, where was the question of parents abetting the offence. He claimed that the teenager had tried to save the victim. A separate case against the teenager, who turned major four days after the April 4, 2016 accident, is going on before a sessions court here. The sessions court was informed by the police that they were awaiting the forensic results and would file a supplementary charge sheet thereafter. The court listed the matter for July 26 for hearing of arguments on framing of charges and on the appeal filed by the teenager challenging an order of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) holding that the boy would face trial as an adult. According to the police, the teenager had fatally run over victim Siddharth Sharma with his father’s Mercedes when the victim was trying to cross a road near Ludlow Castle School in north Delhi on April 4 last year. In the charge sheet against the parents and the driver, police said it has been established during the probe that the juvenile in conflict with law (JCL) had been driving the car in a fit condition for last three years. The vehicle was registered in the name of a company owned by his parents, Manoj and Indu Aggarwal. “JCL was a repeat offender and he had been driving this vehicle with consent of his parents who intentionally aided by illegal omission by allowing their minor son to drive the offending car who drove it dangerously by over-speeding the vehicle and in this way did an act with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death by such act which ultimately culminated in death of pedestrian Sidharth Sharma,” it said. Regarding the mother, the police said she had never questioned her son about driving the vehicle in a routine manner and she was equally liable for abetting the offence. It said there was sufficient evidence on record to charge sheet the parents and their driver, as it relied on the call details records (CDRs) analysis of the boy and the three accused besides the previous traffic challans issued in their firm’s name. The driver had earlier claimed that he was driving the Mercedes at the time of accident but had done a volte-face after he got to know the victim was dead. Regarding the driver, the charge sheet said he had intentionally given false information to the police to save the teenager from punishment. The telephonic conversations between the teenager, his father and the driver just after the incident proved that all the three planned to screen the boy from prosecution, it said. The charge sheet was filed against the three persons for allegedly abetting the offences of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, destruction of evidence and giving false information under the IPC and under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. Police cited 57 prosecution witnesses in support of its case and the teenager’s friends, who were accompanying him in the car, have also been made witnesses to show that he was driving the vehicle at the time of the incident. Manoj Aggarwal and Mishra were earlier arrested and later granted bail by the court. Indu Aggarwal was also granted anticipatory bail on April 27. The police had on May 26, 2016 chargesheeted the boy in JJB for culpable homicide not amounting to murder which entails a maximum of 10 years jail. The JJB had on June 4 last year ordered that the boy would face trial as an adult while observing that the offence allegedly committed by him was “heinous”. It is the first-of-its-kind case since the amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 which allowed the Board to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to the sessions court.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)

© 2019 Yuva Sai Sagar. Theme by Anders Norén.