Click to play videoNew Delhi: The quest for justice for Priyadarshini Mattoo and her family began afresh in the Delhi High Court on Thursday, with the court ruling that the case will be heard on a day-to-day basis from September 5.
Interestingly, the case was investigated by the elite investigating agency, CBI.
Hearing a CBI appeal against the lower court's verdict in the case, the court snubbed the prosecution, saying "the investigators seem to be deliberately leaving gaping holes so that the accused can slip through."
On its part, the CBI told the court that it has consistent and tangible evidence to establish culpability of Santosh Singh in the case.
"Notwithstanding the trial judge citing 14 reasons for acquitting the accused, we have enough material to connect the accused to the crime," Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subrahmaniam told a Division Bench of the Justice R S Sodhi and Justice P K Bhasin.
Subrahmaniam's assertion came during the opening of arguments in the case.
Earlier, the court found that as many as 51 documents were missing from the paper book. The registrar's office directed the court to make good of these deficiences within a week.
The defence had argued that the case be adjourned till the paper book is complete. However, the court refused an adjournment.
On January 2, 1996, Priya's friends were shell-shocked when they read the morning newspapers reporting the brutal rape and murder of the 23-year-old law graduate. The vivacious smile and the zeal towards life brutally cut short.
"She had the zeal to live, " says Indu Jalali, Priyadarshini friend.
Priyadarshini was allegedly murdered by her college senior Santosh Singh. She had complained in 1995 that Santosh, son of senior police officer JP Singh, was stalking and harassing her.
On the morning of January 23, Santosh was seen trying to enter the house of Priyadarshini's uncle in South Delhi. He allegedly entered the premises on the pretext of striking a compromise with her over the police case.
Santosh then allegedly raped Priyadarshini and strangulated her with an electric wire before battering her face with his helmet.
Priyadarshini's body was found with 14 injury marks. The case was later handed over to the CBI for investigation.
But all hopes of the Mattoo family were dashed when on December 3, 1999 when the lower court set Santosh Singh free.
The only solace for the family was the judge's observation where he said he knew that Santosh was the man who committed the crime, but was forced to acquit him due to lack of evidence, giving him the benefit of doubt.
The CBI appealed against the judgment in 2000, but till date not a single hearing has taken place and Priyadarshini's 70-year-old father continues his quest for justice.
MATTOO CASE: WHAT WENT WRONG |
- Priyadarshini Mattoo's friends were shell shocked when they read the morning newspapers on January 24, 1996. Their friend, a 23-year-old law graduate, was brutally raped and murdered. The vivacious smile and the zeal towards life brutally cut short.. |
- "She had a zest for life. She had the courage to stand up and fight for what is right," Priyadarshini's friend, Indu Jalali said. |
- Priyadarshini was allegedly murdered by her college senior Santosh Singh. She had complained in 1995 that Santosh, son of senior police officer JP Singh, was stalking and harassing her. |
- On the morning of January 23, Santosh entered Priyadarshini's uncle's house, in South Delhi. He had claimed that he come to strike a compromise with her over the police case. |
- Santosh then allegedly raped Priyadarshini and strangulated her with an electric wire before battering her face with his helmet. |
- Priyadarshini's body was found with 14 injuries. |
- The case went into trial and was soon handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation. |
| - But all hopes of the Mattoo family were dashed when on December 3, 1999 the lower court set Santosh Singh free. |
| - The only solace for the family was the judge’s observation that he knew that Santosh was the man who had committed the crime but was forced to acquit him due to lack of evidence, giving him the benefit of doubt. |
| - The CBI appealed against the judgement in 2000 and the court verdict on the appeal finally came after as many as six years. |
With Agency inputs
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
More on IBNLive Right Now
MOST SHARED
PHOTOGALLERY
