Delhi court defers arguments on charges in NEET case
Grants defence time till Aug 17 to identify deficient documents
Arguments on the framing of charges in the NEET-UG 2026 paper leak case were deferred by a Delhi court after two accused sought the supply of allegedly deficient or missing documents.
The court, while hearing applications moved on behalf of Prahlad Vithalrao Kulkarni and Dr Manoj Bhagwanrao Shirure under Sections 230 and 231 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), granted the defence time till August 17 to identify any deficient or illegible documents.
The counsel for Kulkarni submitted that several documents were either missing or deficient. The counsel also claimed that some documents relied upon by the CBI had not been supplied along with the chargesheet. A similar application was moved on behalf of Shirure seeking the list of unrelied documents.
The CBI, however, told the court that all documents relied upon by it had already been placed on record. The special public prosecutor said the investigating officer was ready to assist the defence in identifying the documents. The court was also informed that a soft copy of the chargesheet and accompanying documents had been supplied to the accused on August 6.
The prosecution further submitted that no written request or application regarding deficient or illegible copies had been filed by any accused till date. It said that since around 400 documents were involved, further clarification by the investigating officer would require substantial time.
The court directed the defence counsels to file applications, if required, by August 17, with advance copies to the CBI prosecutor and the investigating officer, specifically identifying deficient or illegible documents. The IO was directed to clarify the position and supply any document found to have not been provided on the same day.
The court said the defence’s separate contention that certain documents relied upon by the CBI had not been supplied would be considered after the exercise concerning deficient or missing documents was completed.
On the demand for the list of unrelied documents, the CBI sought time to either make oral submissions or file a formal reply. The court directed that any such reply be supplied in advance to the accused’s counsel.
In view of the pending applications, the court deferred arguments on the point of charge. The matter has been listed for August 17, when all accused are to be produced through video-conferencing after being remanded to judicial custody.
