Raj Kumar Sethi’s murder: Binder Gujjar, 4 others acquitted

GURUGRAM: A city court on Tuesday acquitted gangster

Binder Gujjar

and four others in property dealer

Raj Kumar Sethi’s murder

case for lack of evidence. The crime, which took place on November 10, 2015, was caught on a CCTV camera, and Gujjar had confessed to have committed the crime in

police

custody.

The police failed to produce enough credible evidences against the gangster and other four though investigators had recovered the murder weapon and the vehicle used by assailants to commit the crime.

Gujjar, one of the notorious gangsters of Gurgaon, is the arch rival of gangster Sandeep Gadoli, who was killed in an alleged police encounter in Mumbai.

Additional sessions judge

RK Mehta

on Tuesday acquitted Gujjar and four others after the witness in the case turned hostile and results of forensic tests of CCTV footage and arms turned out to be negative.

Gujjar (42), a councillor from Ward 21 at the time of the incident, was accused of hiring contract killers for Rs 15 lakh to eliminate Sethi (32), an aide of slain gangster Sandeep Gadoli.

Sethi had gone out to distribute gifts on the eve of Diwali in 2015 when he was stopped and shot by four shooters near a petrol pump in Sector 5. The murder was captured on a CCTV camera installed in the petrol pump, and the footage had gone viral on social media.

On December 5, 2015, police arrested Gujjar, two shooters — Maninder alias Monu (22) and Pawan alias Munna (23) — and others identified as Sumit Kumar (24) and Nadeem (25).

Nadeem was an arms supplier, according to police. The fourth suspect, Sumit Kumar, is a resident of Manohar Nagar. Police had earlier claimed that Nadeem had confessed to have provided firearms to Gujjar for the murder.

During the interrogation, Gujjar had confessed to police that he had planned Raju’s murder to settle scores with rival gangster Gadoli. Sethi was Gadoli’s financer. “Two eyewitnesses turned hostile in the court… Everything (murder) was recorded by a CCTV cam and an accused had confessed his role. Despite this, the prosecution has failed to prove its charges,” said Sunny Tanwar, the counsel for complainant, adding that everything was in public domain, but the court delivers verdict on the basis of evidences, which “was not in our favour”.