Tag: Shraddha Murder

Shraddha murder case

Shraddha Case: DNA Confirms Bone, Hair Samples Are Of Shraddha Walkar

By LokMarg

In a major development in the Shraddha Walkar murder case, the Delhi Police on Wednesday said that samples of hair and bones recovered by them matched that of Shraddha.

A mitochondrial DNA report of the samples found in the forest area of Mehrauli and sent for testing at the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting Diagnostic (CDFD) in Hyderabad has matched with that of the victim’s father and brother, the Delhi Police said.
The bone and hair samples were sent to Hyderabad for “DNA Mitrocondrial profiling” as the DNA couldn’t be extracted from the body parts.

“Mitochondrial DNA report confirms hair and bone sample matching with Shraddha Walker. Delhi Police has received the report from the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics,” said Special Commissioner of Police (Law and Order) Sagar Preet Hooda.

“One piece of bone and a bunch of hair purported to be of the deceased have matched with that of her father and brother which establishes the identity of the bone and hair to be that of Shraddha Walker,” Special CP added.

He further said that the bones will now be sent for post-mortem examination to be conducted by a medical board at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS).

Shraddha was allegedly killed by her live-in partner Aaftab Amin Poonawala.

Aftab allegedly chopped her body into 35 pieces, bought a refrigerator and stored them in it before he disposed them off at different locations in and around Delhi during the night hours for the next 18 days.

Police had earlier said Aaftab, who confessed to killing Shraddha and chopping her body into pieces, gave misleading answers to questions

Notably, Delhi Police is currently investigating the murder case.

In November, Shraddha’s father Vikash Madan Walkar, a resident of Palghar (Maharashtra), approached Mumbai police and lodged a missing person complaint.

During the initial investigation, Shraddha’s last location was found in Delhi, and on the basis of this, the case was transferred to Delhi Police.

Shraddha’s father told the police about his daughter’s relationship with Aftab and suspected his involvement in his daughter’s absence.

During the investigation, it was found that Aaftab and Shraddha had come to Delhi and started living in a rented apartment in the Chhattarpur Pahadi area. The police during the course of the investigation, traced Aftab and nabbed him.

Aftab, during questioning, confessed to the crime and said that they fought often as Shraddha was pressuring him for marriage.

Recently, Aaftab has moved an application seeking bail on the grounds that the initial investigation in the case has been completed.

The bail application moved through the legal aid counsel has stated that the initial investigation in the matter is completed and a charge sheet is to be filed.

Aaftab Poonawala is in judicial custody till December 23.

Aaftab’s polygraph test and Narco Analysis test have also been conducted.

The Delhi Police will file a charge sheet in the matter soon. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176

Shraddha Aaftab's Case

Shraddha Murder: Court Allows Cops To Access Aaftab Voice Sample

By LokMarg

Allowing the plea of Delhi Police seeking permission to obtain a voice sample of accused Aaftab Amin Poonawala in the Shraddha Walker murder case, a Delhi court on Friday said even though the fair trial is a right of an accused at the same time, a fair investigation is required in the larger public interest.

Metropolitan Magistrate Vijayshree Rathore of Saket court said, “True, a fair trial is the right of the accused but it is also true that fair investigation is also required in the larger public interest as the offense cannot escape and crime cannot go unnoticed merely because the accused is not ready to aid in the investigation.”
Thus, the application moved by the Investigating Officer (IO) seeking permission for a voice sampling test of the accused is allowed, the court ordered.

The court also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court of India in ‘Ritesh Sinha vs State UP’, which clarified the position that “judicial order compelling a person to give a sample of his voice is not violative of Fundamental Right to Privacy, under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India”.

It was further observed in the case that the Fundamental Right to Privacy cannot be

construed as absolute and must bow down to compelling public interest, the court noted.

The court said the contention of counsel for the accused that consent of the accused is mandatory even in the case of the voice sampling test cannot be accepted.

It is clear that a voice sampling test can be conducted even if the accused does not consent to the same. An opportunity of seeking the will of the accused after informing the nature

of application moved by IO is already granted to the accused, the court said.

The court observed, “Even though the accused is not willing to give voice sample for voice sampling test, however, I am of the considered view that the accused can still be asked to give the voice sample to investigating agency for reaching the ends of the justice and also for a fair investigation.”

There is no such prohibition of compulsory consent of recording the accused in handwriting, fingerprint impression, and voice sampling test, the court said.

“The voice samples procured for the purpose of investigation cannot be considered as testimonial compulsion. This is just the only method by which an investigating agency collects the material against the accused for the purpose of attaining ends of justice,” the court observed.

Advocate MS Khan Counsel for the accused opposed the plea and contended that a copy of the application filed by the IO seeking voice sampling/willingness to be provided to him.

He further argued that since the right of the accused would be decided, therefore he has a right to obtain a copy of the application, and further he also has the right to reply to the said application.

The court said it is to be noted that this is merely an investigation proceeding and the right of the accused to defend himself would definitely accrue at the stage of trial where an opportunity of hearing as well as defending himself would definitely be granted to him.

Therefore, no merits lie in the arguments raised by the Counsel for the accused that the copy of this application is necessary to be supplied to him, the court said.

“This is a sensitive case where the contents of this and the nature of the application moved by IO is already brought to the knowledge of the accused. Further, at this investigation stage, this proceeding is conducted just to provide an opportunity for a hearing for the accused. Thus, the contention of the counsel for the accused is dismissed,” the court added.

Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad submitted that the accused has no right to be heard at this stage of the investigation.

“The SPP relied upon the judgment of 11 Judges Bench in the ‘State Vs Kathi Kalu Oghad and Ritesh Sinha vs State of UP’, as relied on bringing home the point that at the stage of investigation and for collection of evidence, the accused has no right to be heard and it is for this Court to ensure that due process of law has been followed while collecting of evidence,” the court said.

He also relied upon the judgment in another case and submitted that the prosecution is complying with the guidelines issued in the judgment for the Voice Sampling test.

The accused was given the liberty to consult with his advocate via video conferencing mode. After consulting his lawyer, Aaftab said he was not willing to give consent for a voice sample. (ANI)

Read more: http://13.232.95.176/