Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Journalism of Courage
Premium
Delhi court summons Lawrence Bishnoi, others in extortion case a month after discharge
Police had arrested Haren Sarapdadiya, Ashish Sharma, and apprehended two juveniles in connection with the shooting.
However, the magistrate court, in its discharge order, noted that there was no evidence against the accused in the extortion case except their own disclosure statements.
A Delhi court on Monday summoned jailed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi and his associates, accused in cases related to firing and extortion, over a month after they were discharged owing to “absence of any apparent overt act leading towards the act of extortion”.
The notices followed a revision petition filed by the state against the discharge order issued in February. ASJ Vishal Singh of Saket district court has asked Bishnoi to be present before it on April 18.
The case of extortion was registered against Lawrence and others by the Delhi Police in April 2023 after shots were fired outside the house of businessman Ramandeep Singh. Lawrence’s brother and close aide Anmol Bishnoi, who had allegedly demanded Rs 1 crore from Singh, later claimed responsibility for the firing, police had said. A separate case related to the firing was filed.
Police had arrested Haren Sarapdadiya, Ashish Sharma, and apprehended two juveniles in connection with the shooting. Police had also named Lawrence and one Sampat Nehra as the key conspirators in the case, while one Akshay Bishnoi was accused of supplying arms.
However, the magistrate court, in its discharge order, noted that there was no evidence against the accused in the extortion case except their own disclosure statements.
The court observed that the complainant had not alleged any delivery of property under threat, nor was this mentioned in the chargesheet. “Thus, the accused persons are not liable to be charged for an offence punishable under Section 386 of the IPC,” Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Nupur Gupta had said on February 20.
“To constitute an offence of extortion, there must be actual delivery of property, money, or valuable security induced by fear. Mere demands or threats without delivery do not suffice,” the court had also said.
Story continues below this ad
The state then moved the sessions court and challenged the order with a revision petition.
Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Live Blog