Delhi court denies pre-arrest bail to wrestler Sushil Kumar

NEW DELHI: A sessions court on Tuesday dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of Olympic medallist wrestler Sushil Kumar in the case of 23-year-old grappler Sagar Dhankad’s death after a brawl at Chhatrasal Stadium.
Kumar called the allegations against him “unfounded, baseless, scurrilous and preposterous” with the only motive to “humiliate and injure” his reputation.
Additional sessions judge Jagdish Kumar, however, observed that the allegations against Kumar were serious. “From the perusal of the record of investigation done so far, it reveals that prima facie the applicant/accused is the main conspirator and the FIR is not an encyclopedia. The investigation is still going on and some of the accused have not been arrested,” the order stated.
The court further noted that Kumar also faced a non-bailable warrant and clarified that it was not observing anything on the facts of the case at the stage of anticipatory bail as it might prejudice the parties. “The statements of eyewitnesses are also there. So at this stage, the court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. The application is dismissed,” it held.
During arguments, senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, along with advocates RS Jakhar and Kumar Vaibhaw, contested the account of a witness saying he had antecedents but police hadn’t brought this fact on record. “Why is there complete silence about the conduct and antecedents of Sonu? The police’s reply (to Kumar’s plea) is incomplete,” Luthra said.
Referring to the FIR, which stated that bullets were fired in the air, Luthra contested the application of IPC Section 302 (murder) calling the case “malicious”, adding that Kumar’s wife was called to the police station and cops hadn’t disclosed seizing his passport.
Denying the authenticity of charges against Kumar, the counsel underscored the delay of about six hours between registration of the FIR and the incident. He accused the investigating agency of not attributing any motive behind the alleged crime. Police had made recoveries, thereby negating any need of Kumar’s custodial interrogation, argued Luthra.
Public prosecutor Atul Shrivastava opposed the plea submitting that Kumar and his associates had forcibly driven the victim to Chhatrasal Stadium, where he was beaten up mercilessly. The motive behind the crime was stated to be the victim vacating the flat owned by Kumar’s wife without paying the rent for two months. The prosecution further informed the court that Kumar’s passport wasn’t seized, but taken by police to record particulars and inform the authorities concerned in case he tried to flee.