|
Delhi cab rape case:'Locate juvenile offenders' |
| By: MiD DAY Correspondent | | Date:
2010-09-21 | | Place: Delhi | |
|
|
A Delhi court asks cops to depute senior personnel in nabbing the co-accused of the 'rapist' driver
 | | In focus: The main accused, Lalit, the school cab driver. | While most of the focus is on Lalit, the school cab driver, for allegedly sexually exploiting a minor girl and her two brothers in the Capital, a Delhi court asked the city police to find his two juvenile 'accomplices'.
The court made the observation as Lalit was produced before it after the end of his two-day custodial interrogation. The police told the court that only two out of the four co-accused have been arrested till now.
The police also blamed the school authorities for not helping with the investigators in locating the other accused. Similar allegations were made by the police on September 18 when Lalit was produced before the court. Metropolitan Magistrate Ajay Garg said: "Some senior personnel from Delhi Police should be deployed to help the woman officer in nabbing the two juveniles."
On September 17, the story of the sexual exploitation of three school going children, including a 12-year-old girl and two young boys of 11 and 7 years, came to light. The driver, who used to ferry the kids from their Prasad Nagar residence to the school, is alleged to have sexually assaulted them for nearly two years, with his four accomplices, who are all minors and students of class VIII and IX. Meanwhile, the court sent Lalit, who was arrested on September 17, to 14 days in judicial custody.
NO MERCY
The Delhi HC on Monday upheld the 7-year prison term awarded to a man for raping the infant daughter of his neighbour more than 2 decades ago. Dismissing an appeal filed by Suresh against the conviction order of May 1996, Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra said, "the case was proved at trial beyond reasonable doubt." Justice Dhingra rejected Suresh''s argument that the mother of the victim wanted to establish physical relation with him but he refused, and therefore she had lodged complaint against him. |
|
|
