During a cross-examination of the Investigating Officer (IO) Pratibha Sharma in the December 16 Delhi gangrape case,the defence counsel on Monday requested the court to examine the case diary after the prosecution refused to reveal details related to secret information which had enabled police to find the bus allegedly involved in the incident.
V K Anand,counsel for the accused Mukesh,had asked the IO to furnish the time when the information was received by police and whether it was recorded in the case diary.
Under Sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act,the IO cannot reveal any particulars of such information, Dayan Krishan,special prosecutor in the case said.
However,V K Anand insisted that under Section 172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,the court could call for the case diary in which particulars of the investigation would have been recorded. During the cross examination,A P Singh,counsel for the accused Vinay and Akshay,raised questions regarding the recovery of clothes and personal effects from the two.
Memos on recovery of case material from Vinays house were not signed by witnesses, Singh said,arguing that that the materials recovered in the case were tampered to incriminate them in the matter.
He insisted that the materials were not recovered from the accused directly but were collected from their kin. He also alleged that Abhay Singh,brother of Akshay,was detained by the police,subjected to torture and then forced to bring Akshays clothes from his house. Hence,the timing of deposit of such property is not mentioned in the records, A P Singh said.
A P Singh further maintained that Vinay and Akshay were falsely implicated in the case. He claimed that Vinay was at a musical show on the date of the incident and Akshay had left Delhi on December 15,2012,a day prior to the incident.
IO Sharma however,denied all allegations of fabrication of evidence or false implication of the accused. When V K Anand and A P Singh observed that owing to political pressure,statements of the rape victim were recorded by the IO even though she was unfit to make such statements,IO Sharma responded that she was unaware of any such pressure.