The CBI has received another setback in the murder case of NHAI engineer Satyendra Dubey with the defence claiming before the ADJ court in Patna that the three accused named by the investigating agency were minors at the time of commission of offence in November 27,2003. During a recent hearing,the defence suddenly claimed that the accused were juveniles in 2003. If the court accepts this,it will be a major setback, CBIs deputy legal advisor and prosecutor L R Ansari told The Indian Express over phone from Patna,where the trial has been underway for the last five years. Significantly,the juvenile plea has been raised at a time when the entire evidence has been closed and,according to Ansari,the conviction is due by the end of July. Since the three accusedMontu Kumar,Uday Kumar and Pinku Ravidascould not produce a birth or school certificate to prove their age,the court ordered their medical examination. The medical report puts their age between 22 and 24 years, said Ansari. If the court accepts the lower limit of 22,it will mean the accused were less than 18 at the time the crime was committed and the case would have to be transferred to a juvenile court. If the case is shifted,it will throw the entire proceedings out of gear as then the case will be contested according to the Juvenile Act, said Ansari. According to an SC order,the juvenile plea can be raised at any stage of the trial,even after the conviction. With the next hearing scheduled for Wednesday,the agency is clueless on how to counter the juvenile plea. We cannot do anything in this regard. It is up to the court to decide, said Ansari. While the CBI might have been caught off guard,the fact remains that any prosecution agency is expected to confirm its jurisdiction,nature of the offence and liability of the offender before taking a case. If the CBI now fails to produce sufficient evidence to prove that those it had charged with various offences were not minors and hence culpable for the offence,the entire prosecution case it has built over the years will fall flat. This is not the first time the CBI has fumbled with the case. On June 6,2004,the CBI had made its first arrests in the case and eight days later the agency declared that it was a case of robbery and not related to the instances of corruption in the Golden Quadrilateral project,revealed by Dubey in a November 2002 letter to the PMO. The robbery case,said Ansari,was based on the testimony of one Sarvan Paswan,an accused who later turned approver. Moreover,prime accused Montu Kumar,who the agency said had shot Dubey,fled from police custody on September 13,2005 but was arrested in October. He is now lodged in the Beur jail. This is not all. Two suspects in the case,Sheonath Sah and Mukendra Paswan,were found poisoned on February 1,2004,within 24 hours of their interrogation by the CBI. Sahs father had lodged an FIR against the CBI,but then CBI Director Umashanker Mishra had ruled out foul play and declared their deaths a suicide a few days later.
