DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Nafe Singh murder case: Complainant, kin given adequate security: state to HC

Plea of INLD leader's driver seeking additional cover dismissed

  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
The Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Advertisement

The Haryana Government has informed the Punjab and Haryana High Court that it has provided adequate security to complainant Rakesh Kumar and his family in the murder case of former MLA Nafe Singh Rathee.

Advertisement

On February 25, 2024, four shooters had opened fire at the SUV of INLD leader Rathee at the Barahi level crossing in Bahadurgarh of Jhajjar district, killing him and a party worker. Three private gunmen hired by Rathee also sustained injuries in the attack.

Advertisement

In his petition, Kumar — who was Rathee's driver—stated that he was the complainant as well as an eyewitness in the FIR dated February 26, 2024, and sought issuance of directions to respondents to grant additional security to him and his family. He also urged that the head warden of the Rewari District Jail be added to his security detail, or replace a policeman already deputed in his security.

Advertisement

In the FIR, Kumar had stated that a white car was following their vehicle. Kumar tried to speed away, but was forced to stop as the Barahi level crossing was closed. Suddenly, five assailants stepped out of the car and opened fire.

The state counsel submitted that adequate security had been given to the petitioner and his family. He also submitted that the prayer to depute respondent no. 5 in the petitioner’s security could not be considered as he was working as the head warden at the District Jail, under the DGP (Prisons), who has not been impleaded as party in the petition.

Advertisement

After hearing the arguments, Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya said the facts have not been disputed by the petitioner nor has he impleaded the DGP as respondent. In view thereof, the petition stands disposed of as no further directions were called for at this stage.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts