Srinagar, May 29 : Central Bureau of Investigation on Friday filed chargesheet against J&K Police Inspector for cruelty and dowry death of his wife two years ago at Jammu.
The chargesheet was filed before the CJM, Jammu against an Inspector of J&K Police, Vivek Bassan, under RPC section 498-A (cruelty), 304-B (dowry death) and section 7 read with 27 (3) of the Arms Act 1959 for the murder of his wife Neha Kumari.
The CBI had registered the case on 26 March last on the J&K High Court orders on 28 January 2019 of on a petition filed by father of the deceased and taken over the investigation of the case. The police had earlier registered FIR (85 of 2018) at Police Station, Pacca Danga, Jammu on the allegations of the death of Kumari in suspicious circumstances on 26febuary 2018, due to gunshot injury from the service pistol of her husband, working as Inspector of J&K Police.
“Inquest proceedings were carried out by the local police into the incident u/s 174 Cr. PC and thereafter, the FIR was registered on 18.05.2018,” a CBI official said in a statement.
CBI said that its investigation with the assistance of forensic experts and reconstruction of scene of crime led to the unearthing of the criminal conspiracy behind the murder.
“It was alleged that the deceased was being subjected to cruelty in relation to demand for dowry and was murdered by her husband by using his service pistol,” the CBI said, “ It was also revealed an alleged conspiracy to manipulate evidence so as to reflect the incident as suicide.”
On the basis of evidence gathered during investigation, CBI arrested the accused Inspector today. “The accused was produced before the CJM, Jammu and remanded to Judicial Custody,” the premier investigation agency said.
While handing over the case to CBI, the high court has observed: “Although the accused had been subjected to a polygraph test, no effort was made by the investigating officer (of police) to even carry forward the process in regard to obtaining sanction for subjecting the accused to a Narco Analysis test which request had been made as early as on 25.03.2018.”
The Investigating Officer, the court observed, also does not appear to have taken up the issue with the Ballistic expert as to what was the distance from which the weapon had been fired to determine as to whether it was a case of suicide or one of murder.
“The report of the Ballistic expert also appears to be illusory and cryptic and does not lay down the basic scientific parameters, based upon which, an expert investigator could come to a definite conclusion. If the report of the Ballistic expert was cryptic, the investigating officer should have been quick to get the necessary clarifications which are found conspicuously absent in the present case.”
