HC judge recuses from hearing Ryan group owners’ anticipatory bail plea

CHANDIGARH: One of the Punjab and Haryana high court judges, Justice A B Chaudhari, on Tuesday recused himself from hearing a petition filed by the founders of Ryan Groups of Institutions seeking anticipatory bail in the Pradhyumn murder case.

Augustine Pinto, his wife and managing director (MD) Grace

Pinto

and son

Ryan Pinto

had moved the HC seeking stay on their arrest in relation to the seven-year-old boy’s murder case.

When their plea came up for hearing before the HC, Justice Chaudhari orally observed that the Pinto family was known to him and thus he would not hear the matter.

He referred the matter to the Chief Justice’s bench for hearing of the case by an appropriate bench. The case would now come up for hearing on Wednesday before some other bench.

Apprehending arrest in the case, the Pinto family had prayed for anticipatory bail and requested the HC to issue directions that they be released on bail in case of arrest in relation to the FIR registered on September 8 at Police Station Bhondsi, Gurgaon.

In their plea for interim relief, Augustine Pinto and his wife Grace Pinto, residents of Borivali (East) Mumbai, told the court that they had deep roots in the society, they pose no risk and there could be no apprehension of their absconding.

“We unconditionally undertake to join the investigation and participate in any manner that the investigating agency sees fit and to abide by the terms and conditions,” the petitioners submitted in their plea filed through advocate

Arshdeep Singh Cheema

.

In another plea for interim bail, Ryan Pinto has submitted that he has no role whatsoever in the tragic incident, as he is neither connected with Ryan International School Gurgaon nor its managing committee.

“The only reason that the name of the petitioner is being dragged into this case is because the petitioner happens to be the son of the trustees of the St. Xavier education trust which has started the Ryan International School,” argued his lawyer R S Rai and Abhinav Sood before the HC.

While declining to give any relief, the Bombay high court on September 14 had only stayed their arrest till September 15. They had approached the Bombay high court for transit bail. Their passports have already been impounded on the directions from the court.

They want interim stay on their arrest in relation to the case registered on September 8 under section 302 (murder), under section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act for willfully neglecting safekeeping of a child in actual custody and section 12 of prevention of children from sexual offences act 2012.

Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India. Don't miss daily games like Crossword, Sudoku, and Mini Crossword.