Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The bench comprising of Justice R.K. Agrawal and Justice A.M. Sapre on Monday rejected the petition for the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to Ryan International Group CEO Ryan Pinto and his parents Augustine and Grace Pinto, the chairman and MD respectively. The bail was granted in the student Pradyuman Thakur's murder case.
On September 8, 7-year-old Pradyuman Thakur was murdered inside the Ryan International School premises in Gurugram, Haryana. A FIR was registered against the Pintos under Section 302 of IPC, Section 25 of the Arms Act, Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act and they were taken into custody accordingly. In this manner, in perspective of the Haryana government notification dated September 17 and DoPT notice dated September 22, the investigation in the issue was transferred to the CBI and the agency had filed a new FIR on September 22. By order dated October 7, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana had guided the Pinto family to join the CBI investigation and for them to be discharged on interim bail in case of arrest.
In the present matter Petitioner, Barun Chandra Thakur, father of Pradyuman Thakur, had challenged the said interim relief by way of a S.L.P. wherein the Supreme Court had on November 6 declined to meddle with the relief and directed the high court to choose whether to allow anticipatory bail or not. The high court, on November 21, considering that the CBI has not expedited record any proof to relate the Pintos with any lapse or negligence with respect to the school management, and that the FIR held up did not say criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the IPC, had allowed anticipatory bail to the Pinto family, subject to the conditions that they might not leave the nation pending the investigation and that they should not alter any evidence or witnesses.
On Wednesday, the counsel for the petitioners submitted before the bench that there was a danger of the Pintos utilizing their well-to-do and compelling position to upset the CBI investigation by inducement, threat or promise to any individual familiar with the actualities of the case. It was likewise contended that the way in which the crime scene had been dressed and compromised, the association at some level of the managerial authorities couldn't be avoided. Further, the way that the school authorities had neglected to register a FIR in regard of the incident was additionally depended upon.
86540
103860
630
114
59824