Between crime and punishment

And according to Virender Prasad, who worked with the Mattoo family and ran an errand for Priyadarshani the day she was killed the sequence of events is at variance with what the CBI says.

Especially on the role of Priyadarshani8217;s personal security officer Rajendra Singh. While the CBI says that Singh and another constable entered the house and saw the body, Prasad8217;s version is different. He says that Rajinder Singh told him that he couldn8217;t enter the house since the door was locked. And even when Prasad pointed out to Singh that the door was partially open, he drove away on his motorcycle saying he would come back in ten minutes. It was only then that Prasad entered the room and saw the body.

But more of this later.

First, the CBI8217;s claim regarding Prasad8217;s whereabouts. Additional session judge JP Thareja severely criticised the CBI saying 8220;the witness Prasad is the most important witness of the crime. The agency ought to have produced him to arrive at a correct conclusion of the case.8221; But the CBI told the court that Prasad wasn8217;t examined because 8220;the witness was not at his native villageiquest;his whereabouts were not known to his parents, grandparents and village watchmen.8221;

Prasad, who is in his early twenties, has a different story to tell. A story that suggests the CBI left quite a few stones unturned. For one, Prasad says he never knew he was a 8220;key witness8221; and that he was needed for the trial. 8220;After the murder, I stayed with the family for a few days but then they decided to move to Jammu so I came back home. I stayed here six to seven months and then went back to Col S.K Dhar8217;s place a 8220;very close relative8221; of the Mattoos. I returned to the village only seven months ago and have been here all the time tilling my family land.

Curiously, the CBI told the court that their team visited his village and were told he8217;s in Mumbai where an investigative officer was sent. Says Prasad: 8220;My mother told me that a man had come from the CBI about one and a half years ago to look for me but he said that he was verifying my address. I have never worked in Mumbai and noone in my family said anything like that to the CBI officer. I have never done anything wrong, so there was never any need for me to hide.8221;

In the first two stories of a five-part series, from March 19 to March 23 this year, Express reporters G. Ananthakrishnan and Tanu Sharma sifted through voluminous High Court and trial court records to lay bare in shocking detail just how and why justice can come close to being denied when it is delayed.

The delay: high court

8226; March 5, 2002: Preparation of 8220;paperbook8221; under process, listed for directions on April 9. The 8220;paperbook8221; is a compilation of all papers from the trial by the High Court Registry 8212; daily orders, witness statements, and the judgment. Papers in local languages 8212; in this case, Hindi 8212; are translated into English and re-typed. Mattoo8217;s father says that there are merely 300 pages in Hindi.

8226; April 9: Preparation of paperbook still under process.

8226; October 23: Registry directed to expedite preparation of paperbook and appeal listed for hearing.

8226; March 26 and May 21,

8226; 2003: Case listed. On both occasions, the paperbook wasn8217;t ready.

The delay: trial court

The Indian Express8217;s scrutiny of the sequence of events in the trial court, leading to the acquittal of the accused, turned up a timeline that was equally shocking. Here, over three years in court 8212; 1996, 1997 and 1998 8212; justice was tripped up by power-cuts and by counsels who said they had no time. Excerpts:

8226; 1996: No lights in court, accused tears chargesheet, wants his motorcycle back.

8226; Jan 23: Mattoo found murdered.

8226; July 4: Case committed to Additional Sessions Judge B B Chaudhary.

8226; Aug 5: No light in courtroom since morning. Counsel for state says it will be difficult to argue in the dark.

8226; Aug 8: Arguments partly heard.

8226; Aug 13: There is no light in courtroom. Counsel for both parties express inability to argue.

8226; Aug 29: Accused directed to be charged under Section 376 rape and 302 murder of IPC. Bail application rejected. At this stage, accused tears chargesheet and throws pieces of paper at the steno saying he is innocent. Counsel for the accused says sorry. Accused offers unconditional apology. Citing this behaviour, Magistrate sends copy of proceedings to High Court with torn chargesheet, waits for HC decision.

8226; Sep 28: Accused moves application for release of his motorcycle.

8226; Oct 5: Defence counsel seeks adjournment of arguments on framing of charge. Public Prosecutor PP has no objection.

8226; Nov 19: Court told that petition by accused against framing of charges has been filed in the High Court which has stayed the trial.

8226; 1997: Case transferred to another judge by mistake, 3 judges in 1 month, probe officer has to attend marriage

8226; Jan 10: HC stay on proceedings.

8226; Feb 6: File not received from HC where accused8217;s petition is pending.

8226; April 5: Even as petition is pending, due to some 8216;8217;inadvertence8217;8217; trial transferred to another court.

8226; May 17: Judge on leave.

8226; May 19: Case re-assigned to judge Chaudhary. File still not received from HC.

8226; June 9: Case transferred to new judge S.C. Mittal after HC lifts stay.

8226; July 7: Defence counsel and Public Prosecutor not available. Case adjourned for framing/retyping of fresh charge.

8226; Sep 30: As no other case pending before court, judge proposes to give dates to CBI for evidence from Oct 1. But PP says he is not available because of earlier busy schedule.

8226; Oct 8: Judge on leave

8226; Oct 20: Statements of Prosecution Witness PW 34. Judge says: 8216;8217;I was proposing to give dates for evidence of CBI from Nov 1. But PP busy in other matters. CBI granted last and final opportunity to record its evidence.8221;

8226; Nov 25: Investigating Officer Lalit Mohan wants statement to be recorded today. PP says not ready for today. Mohan says he has to attend marriage of family member in Rishikesh the next day. Nov 26 date cancelled.

8226; 1998: A judge dies, lawyers suspend work in mourning; bribe charge derails case, lights off again, dictation spread over 70 dates

8226; Feb 17: CBI begins final arguments and concludes on March 7, after seven dates.

8226; March 19: Case adjourned as lawyers suspend work as mark of respect for a deceased judge.

8226; April 18: Court receives copy of letter written to Chief Justice of Delhi HC alleging that court accepted Rs 15 lakh from father of accused and will acquit. 8220;In light of the charges, I do not want to try this case. File be put up before District Judge for transfer,8221; says judge Mittal.

8226; April 22: Case transferred to Additional Sessions Judge G P Thareja.

8226; April 25: File yet to reach Thareja. Judge discloses his record-keeper received letter on April 24. He tells counsel to advise clients to ensure that 8220;no such letters are written to maintain the purity of administration of justice and that everyone refrain from influencing the judge directly or indirectly in any manner.8221;

8226; May 25: Judge on leave.