Parents of a minor, accused of running over a 32-year-old man while driving his father’s Mercedes last year, had “intentionally aided” the wrong act by allowing their child to drive, Delhi Police has told a city court.
Police made the allegation against the teenager’s parents in a charge sheet filed against them in the case.
Metropolitan Magistrate Shefali Barnala Tandon, who had earlier taken cognisance of the charge sheet, today supplied the documents annexed with the final report to the teenager’s parents Manoj Aggarwal (53) and Indu Aggarwal (45) and driver Kapil Kumar Mishra (42), who is also an accused in the case.
The court fixed May 22 for scrutiny of documents.
Advocate Jinendra Jain, who represented the parents, said no offence is made out against them and when the boy had no intention to kill the victim, where was the question of parents abetting the offence. He claimed that the teenager had tried to save the victim.
A separate case against the teenager, who turned major four days after the April 4, 2016 accident, is going on before a sessions court here.
The sessions court was informed by the police that they were awaiting the forensic results and would file a supplementary charge sheet thereafter.
The court listed the matter for July 26 for hearing of arguments on framing of charges and on the appeal filed by the teenager challenging an order of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) holding that the boy would face trial as an adult.
According to the police, the teenager had fatally run over victim Siddharth Sharma with his father’s Mercedes when the victim was trying to cross a road near Ludlow Castle School in north Delhi on April 4 last year.
In the charge sheet against the parents and the driver, police said it has been established during the probe that the juvenile in conflict with law (JCL) had been driving the car in a fit condition for last three years.
The vehicle was registered in the name of a company owned by his parents, Manoj and Indu Aggarwal.
“JCL was a repeat offender and he had been driving this vehicle with consent of his parents who intentionally aided by illegal omission by allowing their minor son to drive the offending car who drove it dangerously by over-speeding the vehicle and in this way did an act with the knowledge that he is likely to cause death by such act which ultimately culminated in death of pedestrian Sidharth Sharma,” it said.
Regarding the mother, the police said she had never questioned her son about driving the vehicle in a routine manner and she was equally liable for abetting the offence.
It said there was sufficient evidence on record to charge sheet the parents and their driver, as it relied on the call details records (CDRs) analysis of the boy and the three accused besides the previous traffic challans issued in their firm’s name.
The driver had earlier claimed that he was driving the Mercedes at the time of accident but had done a volte-face after he got to know the victim was dead.
Regarding the driver, the charge sheet said he had intentionally given false information to the police to save the teenager from punishment.
The telephonic conversations between the teenager, his father and the driver just after the incident proved that all the three planned to screen the boy from prosecution, it said.
The charge sheet was filed against the three persons for allegedly abetting the offences of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, destruction of evidence and giving false information under the IPC and under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Police cited 57 prosecution witnesses in support of its case and the teenager’s friends, who were accompanying him in the car, have also been made witnesses to show that he was driving the vehicle at the time of the incident.
Manoj Aggarwal and Mishra were earlier arrested and later granted bail by the court. Indu Aggarwal was also granted anticipatory bail on April 27.
The police had on May 26, 2016 chargesheeted the boy in JJB for culpable homicide not amounting to murder which entails a maximum of 10 years jail.
The JJB had on June 4 last year ordered that the boy would face trial as an adult while observing that the offence allegedly committed by him was “heinous”.
It is the first-of-its-kind case since the amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 which allowed the Board to transfer cases of heinous offences by children to the sessions court.
( Source – PTI )
