Three acquitted in poisoning case
Two brothers and their associate, facing trial for allegedly poisoning their business rival by making him consume a sedative-laced drink, have been acquitted by a Delhi court.
New Delhi: Two brothers and their associate, facing trial for allegedly poisoning their business rival by making him consume a sedative-laced drink, have been acquitted by a Delhi court.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Virender Bhat let off Delhi-based property dealers Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, his brother Pramod Kumar Tiwari and their associate Ramesh Kumar Bansal, saying complainant Yogender Pratap had implicated them because of a business rivalry and a land related dispute with them.
"Serious doubts have to be entertained in the prosecution case. It appears complainant has ingested some stupefying substance on his own and then made a false story so as to implicate the three accused, with whom he had business rivalry and a dispute regarding plot of land, falsely in this case," said ASJ Bhat.
Complainant Yogender, who too was a property dealer, had lodged a complaint with the police alleging the trio on September 2, 2009, had given him a drink laced with sedatives in their West Delhi office when he had gone there to collect some money from them.
Prosecution said after consuming the drink, Yogender started feeling uneasy and left the place. He started vomiting after reaching his office and was later taken to hospital by his father, it said.
The court, however, said, "the story about vomiting seems to have been concocted as no such vomit or vomit stains were found by the doctor or the investigating officer either on his clothes, which he was wearing at the time of the incident or anywhere in his office."
The ASJ has also rejected the prosecution story, saying the conduct of Yogender and his family members was suspicious.
"The conduct of Yogender, after the alleged incident of poisoning is very suspicious. He did not call his father and brother... He did not visit the clinic, which was on the way to his office from the office of the accused," the court said.
It said the complainant`s family "did not feel perturbed or shocked on seeing his condition" and they also did not show any sense of urgency in providing treatment to him.
"It shows they (Yogender`s family) knew nothing is going to happen to him and hence did not attach any seriousness to his condition," the court said.
Observing that the complainant and his family members were falsely implicating the trio in the case, the court said, "From the evidence led by the prosecution, it cannot be said with certainty that any poisonous substance was administered to the complainant by the accused in the office."