2 weeks Ago
A Ludhiana court has sentenced Manpreet Singh Mani to life imprisonment for the 2020 murder of his colleague, Subhash Jaiswal. LUDHIANA: A local court sentenced a person to life imprisonment for the murder of his colleague. The court of Additional Sessions Judge Amandeep Kaur also imposed a fine of Rs 70,000 on the convict.
In default of payment of the fine, he will have to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years. On 20 July 2020, PAU Police booked Manpreet Singh Mani of Ranjodh Park in Haibowal Kalan under sections 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the IPC. As per the prosecution, Munish Kumar recorded a statement with the police on 20 July 2020.
He stated that he worked as a salesman with Param Wine NK and Company, and his maternal uncle’s son, Subhash Jaiswal , also worked with the firm. Subhash met him on 19 July 2020 at around 6 or 7 pm and told him that the driver of the company, Manpreet Singh Mani, entered into a quarrel with him at the liquor shop and threatened to kill him. The complainant called and told him that they were workers of the same company and should solve the problem amicably.
At around 12 o'clock at night, the owner of the company, Johney Baba, called the complainant and said that someone had given a sword blow to Subhash Jaiswal at the liquor shop of South City Canal, and he was injured. Upon hearing this, the complainant went to the South Canal Bridge and found Subhash Jaiswal lying dead inside the liquor shop. Rajinder Kumar , another employee, said that Subhash Jaiswal and he were preparing to go to bed after closing down the liquor shop when Manpreet Singh Mani called Subhash Jaiswal from outside.
His brother, Subhash Jaiswal, was killed by a driver of the company by giving a sword blow. The police later registered a case against the accused, arrested him, and after completing the investigation, presented a chargesheet in court. During the trial, the accused pleaded false implication.
The defence submitted that the police failed to explain why CCTV footage was not taken into possession. Cross-examination of Prosecution Witness (PW-9) Rajinder Kumar, the eyewitness, revealed that CCTV cameras were installed near the place of the incident, particularly right opposite the liquor vend, and it had full coverage of the liquor vend. The court observed that PW-9, the eyewitness, claimed that cameras were installed outside the liquor vend, but such footage was not taken into police possession.
"No doubt, this is a lapse/defect on the part of the investigating team, but a defect in the investigation by itself cannot be a ground for acquittal," the court remarked. Pronouncing the quantum of the sentence, the court observed that the case didn’t fall within the purview of the rarest of rare cases, which calls for the extreme penalty of death..
