|
The mother of the deceased Sahil Dhaneshra has approached the Delhi High Court for a direction for the CBI investigation. Her son died in the Dwarka accident case. She has alleged laxity on the part of the Investigation Officer (IO).
This case pertains to a road accident of February 3, 2026, in which Sahil Dhaneshra died after being allegedly hit and dragged by a car being allegedly driven by a minor and accompanied by his elder sister. The petition will come up for hearing before the bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee on Monday. Petitioner has moved to the Delhi High Court through advocate Aman Singh Bakshi, Shreesh Chaddha and Divjot Singh Bhatia. She is seeking a direction for the transfer of the investigation from the Delhi police to an independent agency, such as the Central Bureau of Investigation. In the alternative, she has prayed to direct the Delhi police to conduct a free, fair and independent investigation under the monitoring and supervision of the High Court in a time-bound manner. She is also seeking an order for further investigation under Section 193(9) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It is stated that the Petitioner is the mother of Sahil Dhaneshra, who lost his life in the accident allegedly caused by the rash and negligent driving of the accused, who happens to be a Minor aged 17 years, who was operating the offending vehicle in the company of his elder sister. The petitioner has also said that the said incident not only resulted in the untimely loss of life of her young son, causing immeasurable grief and trauma to the Petitioner, but also led to grievous and critical injuries being inflicted upon another cab driver involved in the accident, who was gravely injured due to the rash and negligent driving of the accused/minor. A bare perusal of the facts of the case would go on to crystallise the apprehensions of the Petitioner that the investigation is entirely done at the behest of the accused and his associates in haste and with grave negligence in order to shield the accused, the plea said. Neither the father of the Accused nor the passenger (sister) of the accused has been arraigned as an accused in the present case to date, despite multiple statements being issued by the Police in that regard. No action or arrest has been made to date by the IO, the plea added. It is further stated that even the evidence submitted by the Petitioner in support of the case has not been verified by the IO to date. The petitioner has also questioned the orders passed by the juvenile justice board (JJB) by calling it contradictory. It is further said that on February 4, the accused (Minor) was produced before the JJB, where it was categorically observed that he does not understand the preciousness of a person's life and is not remorseful towards his act. The plea said that without any notice to the petitioner, the accused (Minor) was released on bail as an interim arrangement on February 10. The petitioner has stated that the accused (Minor) was ordered to be released on regular bail to the custody of his father by the JJB on March 10. The petitioner said that this order was contradictory to the own order of JJB passed on February 4. Thus, the petitioner has a strong and genuine apprehension that the father of the Accused and his associates are using all their influence and resources to manage the investigation. (ANI)
|
