BMW mishap: Gaganpreet’s bail plea adjourned to Sept 24
Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium
Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only BenefitsA Delhi court on Saturday deferred the hearing on the bail application of Gaganpreet Kaur, an accused in the Dhaula Kuan BMW accident that led to the death of Navjot Singh, a Deputy Secretary in the Finance Ministry.
Judicial Magistrate Ankit Garg adjourned the proceedings to September 24 after the prosecution sought additional time. Special public prosecutor Atul Shrivastava, assisted by additional public prosecutor Dishank Dhawan, told the court that the victim is yet to be examined and CCTV footage is to be shown to the defendant. The police also stated that Gaganpreet’s mobile phone and driving licence, which are yet to be handed over, remain crucial for the investigation.
The defence, represented by advocate Pradeep Rana, along with Gagan and Abhishek Rana, informed the court that the mobile phone was with the husband of the accused and would be submitted by evening.
During the hearing, three separate applications were placed before the court, including requests for preservation of the call detail records of witness Gulfam and of the accused herself. The court issued a notice to the police and scheduled the matter for the next date.
The issue of CCTV evidence has been a recurring point of contention. The defence had argued that the police should clarify whether the footage they seized actually captures the accident, and not merely the location near Dhaula Kuan.
On Friday, the court made it clear that while preservation orders have already been passed, the prosecuting agency cannot be compelled at the behest of the accused to make a statement on the “veracity or contents” of the material collected.
The judge noted that compliance was awaited from the SHO of the Delhi Cantonment police station regarding whether footage from cameras at pillar numbers 65 and 67 had indeed been secured.
“Orders for the preservation of CCTV footage have already been given. Clarification has also been sought from the SHO to see whether the seized footage contains the required material,” the court recorded.