[ad_1]
The case was originally registered at Civil Lines Police Station in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, but was later transferred to Delhi (File pic/News18)
The divisional panel, chaired by Justice Mukta Gupta and including Judge Poonam Bamba, issued the orders while hearing a petition filed by Solanki challenging the 2019 lower court ruling.
In a major development, the Delhi High Court on Monday overturned the conviction and sentence of former Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) Satyendra Solanki in a case related to the murder of Inder Pal Dhaka on June 24, 1997.
The divisional panel, chaired by Justice Mukta Gupta and including Judge Poonam Bamba, issued the orders while hearing a petition filed by Solanki challenging the 2019 lower court ruling.
“The prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the appellant’s conviction for offenses punishable under Sections 302/307 of the IPC cannot continue. Accordingly, the contested conviction and order against him are annulled,” he said. The court stated in its ruling.
During the ruling, the court took note of the autopsy report, which revealed 17 gunshot wounds consisting of entry and exit wounds on the body of the deceased, indicating significant blood loss. However, contradictory statements in cross-examination indicated that there was not much blood oozing from the body of the deceased’s brother at that time.
“It is hard to believe that someone who was shot at random and wounded 17 would have so little blood from their wounds,” said the bench.
As Satyendra Solanki, Ex-MP, Senior Advocate K.K. Manan and Advocate Udity Bali, while Delhi Police APP was represented by Shubhi Gupta.
In 2019, Satender Solanki and his brother Harender Solanki were convicted by the Patiala House Court in Delhi of murder (302 IPC) and attempted murder (307 IPC).
The case was originally registered at Civil Lines Police Station in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, but was later shifted to Delhi as directed by the Supreme Court.
Solanki’s legal counsel, KK Manan and Uditi Bali, argued that the prosecution’s account was flawed, as there was no clear motive for the killing, given that the attacker and the deceased were not familiar with each other.
“My client is a victim of political rivalry,” Mr. Manan told the Divisional Assembly of the Delhi High Court.
[ad_2]
