Updated: July 2, 2019 7:11:05 am
The Supreme Court Monday dismissed a plea by Popular Front of India leader (PFI) Asim Shariff against the framing of charges against him for the alleged murder of RSS worker Rudresh in Bengaluru in October 2016.
A bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi which rejected the plea said it had gone through the records and it showed that Shariff was the President of the Bengaluru unit of the PFI and the other accused are also members of the outfit.
“It reveals from the chargesheet that there was frequent telephonic/mobile conversation between appellant (accused no. 5) with other accused persons (accused nos. 1 to 4) prior and subsequent to16th October, 2016 (the alleged date of incident) which persuaded the Court to arrive to a conclusion that there is a prima facie material of conspiracy among the accused persons giving rise to sufficient grounds of subjective satisfaction of prima facie case of alleged offences of conspiracy being hatched among the accused persons and truth & veracity of such conspiracy is to be examined during the course of trial”, the court said.
According to the complaint in the case, Rudresh was hacked by the accused who was riding pillion on a motorcycle near Srinivas Medical Stores in Shivajinagar at around 12.40 pm. The accused fled the scene after that Rudresh was taken to a hospital where he was declared brought dead.
Initially, four accused persons (accused nos. 1 to 4) werearrested on October 27, 2016. accused no. 5 (Shariff) was arrested on November 2, 2016. Subsequently, the probe was handed over to the National Investigating Agency (NIA) on December 7, 2016.
NIA registered FIR against all five accused and after investigation, submitted chargesheet against them in April 2017 stating that the accused 1-4 conspired with the accused number 5 to kill RSS members and in furtherance of their acts, they committed offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code. The accused persons were said to be in possession of weapons without license, thereby it attracted the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 27 of the Arms Act.
The appellant and other accused persons sought discharge but this was rejected and charges were framed agaisnt them. This was upheld by the High Court.
Upholding this, the SC said “after going through the records and the judgment impugnedbefore us, in the present facts and circumstances, we find no error in the judgment passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the High Court by the impugned judgment dated 22nd November,2018 which calls for our interference.”
📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines