Friday, Nov 28, 2014

Cop knew his shot could miss bike: Probe report

The District Magistrate described as “improbable and doubtful” the police claim that the motorcyclist had thrown stones at a PCR van which prompted Parmar to open fire. The District Magistrate described as “improbable and doubtful” the police claim that the motorcyclist had thrown stones at a PCR van which prompted Parmar to open fire.
Written by Ananya Bhardwaj | New Delhi | Posted: January 25, 2014 1:49 am

Indicting Inspector Rajneesh Parmar, a magisterial probe into the death of 19-year-old Karan Pandey, who was shot dead while on a motorcycle in the heart of New Delhi last July, has observed that “he was fully aware that firing from a moving vehicle on a moving target by his left hand could result in missing the target”.

Police had claimed that Parmar had shot at the motorcycle in a bid to stop it.

The report said it was an “error in judgement” and “non-application of mind” on the part of Parmar, which made him open fire with his left hand, when in the normal course, he uses his right to operate a weapon.

Police sources said Parmar is currently posted as an executive in the PCR in the New Delhi district.

The District Magistrate described as “improbable and doubtful” the police claim that the motorcyclist had thrown stones at a PCR van which prompted Parmar to open fire.

“There was unnecessary and disproportionate use of force by the officer when he opened fire at the biker as circumstantial evidence suggests that it was not required,” the magistrate said.

The report also said three police officers have confirmed that stone-pelting happened from the left, front or rear side and not from the right. Thus, it is highly unlikely for the driver to have injured his right shoulder as claimed by police.

When his comments were sought on the report, Joint Commissioner of Police (New Delhi Range) Mukesh Meena said, “We heard about the contradictions with regard to our version of events only from the media. We have not received a copy of the report yet and have no knowledge of the recommendations in it.D

We will look into all the points, including the conclusions and the contradictions, raised by the Magistrate in his report, once we receive it. Appropriate action will follow.”

The report also stated that according to the post-mortem examination report, the bullet must have been fired from a close range as it had penetrated the vertebra. However, the ballistic report contradicts this saying that, “no close range phenomena was observed around the hole H1”.

comments powered by Disqus
Featured ad: Discount Shopping

Most Popular