
‘No coherence': Court clean chit to 2 held for firing at Noida cops 15 years ago
Noida: The additional sessions court gave a clean chit to two persons arrested 15 years ago on charges of attempt to murder and possession of illegal firearms for firing at a police team.
The court observed that the statements of the police unit from Surajpur, which had intercepted the two men during a vehicle-checking drive in 2010 and arrested them for firing on the police team, were mutually contradictory. It noted the prosecution failed to convince the court about the recovery of arms and the firing on the police party.
The two men, Satyendra Kumar Yadav and Vinod Singh, had contended that they were falsely implicated by police in a case of attempted murder under Indian Penal Code Section 307 filed on Nov 10, 2010, at Surajpur police station at the behest of Punjab Fibre Company, a private firm.
In its chargesheet, police said during a vehicle-checking drive at the temple roundabout, they were tipped off about two criminals coming in that direction in a white Maruti with some stolen goods from the private company. When the police team flagged the two to stop, the driver of the car opened fire on the police team and attempted to flee.
"They fired at the police with the intent to kill. If their actions resulted in the death of any police personnel, they would have been guilty of murder.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Forget Expensive Wills – Do This Instead
Local Will Finder
Undo
Satyendra was found with a 315-bore pistol and a cartridge, and Vinod with a knife," the FIR stated.
During the trial, the court observed that there was no coherence in the statements of Sub-Inspector Shiv Prakash Singh and other constables in the team. "Constable Lokendra Pal Singh stated that no attempt was made by the police to stop the car, whereas Sub Inspector Shiv Prakash Singh said that they used a torchlight to stop the car, upon which the accused fired on the police," the court noted in the judgment.
It also found the theory of firing on the police party doubtful. "No injury to any police personnel or any other person is shown in the incident, nor is it stated which member of the police party was shot at by the accused. There is no mention of any damage caused to any person or vehicle by the alleged firing, nor is there any mention of the recovery of any cartridge shell after the alleged firing. It is highly unnatural that despite the accused firing with intent to kill and being armed, the police force did not fire in defence," the judgment noted.
The court also questioned the prosecution for not obtaining a forensic report for the recovered pistol and knife and pointed out that no ballistic expert report is available on record, which would indicate whether the recovered alleged 315-bore pistol was actually capable of firing or not.
Based on the observations, the court said the prosecution failed to establish beyond doubt the theory of firing on police with the intent of killing and the recovery of weapons, and accordingly acquitted the duo of the charges under the Arms Act and ordered their release after depositing two sureties of Rs 50,000 each within seven days.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Anna University assault case: Convict gets 30 years in jail, fined ₹90k
The Chennai Mahila Court on Monday sentenced the convict in the Anna University sexual assault case to life imprisonment for at least 30 years and imposed a fine of ₹90,000, reported LiveLaw. The court had earlier found him guilty on all 11 charges levelled against him, based on substantial documentary and forensic evidence. Justice Rajalakshmi, who presided over the case, had reserved the sentencing for June 2 after holding that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The government counsel later confirmed that the prosecution successfully established all charges, including those under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the Information Technology Act, and the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act. The case dates back to December 23, 2024, when a woman student from Anna University lodged a complaint with the All Women Police Station in Kotturpuram, Chennai. According to the complaint, A Gnanasekaran, a biryani vendor from Kottur, threatened her and her male friend before sexually assaulting her in a secluded area on the university premises. Police reports indicated that Gnanasekaran recorded a video of the incident and used it to blackmail the woman and her friend. He was later arrested by the Greater Chennai Police and remanded to judicial custody. FIR leak Following the initial investigation, the FIR was downloaded from the CCTNS website of the Tamil Nadu Police and widely circulated by certain sections of the media, sparking public outrage. The Madras High Court then transferred the investigation to a Special Investigation Team (SIT), which also probed the FIR leak. The SIT filed a chargesheet in February, after which the case was transferred to the Mahila Court. Throughout the trial, the prosecution sought maximum punishment, arguing that the case had been proven beyond reasonable doubt. The court concurred, stating that the documentary and forensic evidence provided by the prosecution was sufficient to establish Gnanasekaran's guilt. Political row over DMK allegations The case also ignited a political controversy after photographs of Gnanasekaran with functionaries of the ruling DMK surfaced online. While BJP leader K Annamalai alleged that Gnanasekaran was a DMK student wing office-bearer, Tamil Nadu Law Minister S Regupathi denied the claim, asserting, 'He is not a party office-bearer.' Chief Minister MK Stalin addressed the matter in the Legislative Assembly, stating, 'I assure you that the one arrested in the Chennai student case is not a member of DMK. He is a DMK sympathiser, we don't deny it.' Gnanasekaran had earlier filed a petition seeking discharge from the case, citing lack of evidence and claiming that his arrest was based on suspicion. The Tamil Nadu Police opposed this plea, and the court heard arguments from both sides before dismissing the petition.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'Gratitude for verdict': Stalin after Anna University sexual assault case accused awarded life sentence
Tamil Nadu chief minister MK Stalin (Image credit: ANI) CHENNAI: Tamil Nadu chief minister MK Stalin praised the Chennai Mahila court's verdict after it awarded the life sentence for a minimum period of 30 years without remission and a fine of Rs 90,000 to the accused Gnanasekaran, who has been convicted of sexually harassing a student on the Anna University campus in December last year. In a post on X, Tamil Nadu CM said the state police responded through action to those who merely pretend to care about women's safety. "Tamil Nadu Police has responded through action to those who merely pretend to care about women's safety. During the investigation, the high court itself appreciated the manner in which the case involving the Chennai student was handled fairly and swiftly, concluded within just five months--securing a severe punishment for the perpetrator," he said. Hitting out at the opposition, CM Stalin said, "Now that the verdict has been delivered, the Mahila Court too has come forward to commend the excellent work of the police in this case. The shallow-minded attempts by a few to seek political gain even from the injustice suffered by a young woman have now been completely shattered." "In line with the recent legal amendment we brought in--stating that there shall be no early release for sexual offenders--the court has imposed a strict sentence in this case with no provisions for remission or any other leniency. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Click Here - This Might Save You From Losing Money Expertinspector Click Here I welcome and express my gratitude for this verdict," he remarked, expressing gratitude to the court. Mahila Court judge M Rajalakshmi, who convicted Gnanasekaran on May 28, today awarded sentences in respect of each of the 11 charges proved by the prosecution against him. Public Prosecutor Marry Jayanthi said, "As far as the Gnanasekaran case is concerned, we have got the verdict today. 30 years without remission have been provided. SIT enquired into the incident; they filed a charge sheet at the Mahila court. April 30 for the first time, affected women took the stage. All evidence was provided, as it was satisfactory for the court; today this judgement has come. The highest punishment is a life sentence for this case, and it has been provided. " A second-year student of Anna University was sexually assaulted on the Anna University campus in December. After an investigation, the Chennai Police had arrested Gananesekaran in connection with the case. On May 28, Tamil Nadu chief minister MK Stalin on Wednesday hailed the state police, investigating officers and government lawyers for the expeditious verdict in the Anna University sexual assault case. Tamil Nadu minister Geetha Jeevan said that the case was resolved in a fast manner and the "right" punishment was given in the court. "The sexual assault case of a student studying on the Anna University campus has resulted in the conviction of the culprit within five months due to the prompt action of the Tamil Nadu government. The case that was held in the court was concluded quickly, and within five months. This case, which took place on December 23rd, was resolved quickly, and the right punishment was given in the court," she said. "According to the chief minister of Tamil Nadu, the punishment has been given in the court... Women who are subjected to violence should come forward to file complaints," the minister stated.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Watch video: Bengaluru woman beats auto driver with slipper then does this bizzare thing!
The streets of Bengaluru witnessed yet another viral drama, this time involving a heated road rage incident between a woman and an auto-rickshaw driver that ended in a public apology. The altercation, which took place in broad daylight near Centro Mall in Bellandur, was captured on camera and quickly spread across social media, drawing strong public reactions. The incident occurred around 3 PM when Pankhuri Mishra, 28, and her husband were riding a two-wheeler and allegedly brushed against the auto-rickshaw driven by a man named Lokesh while merging lanes. The minor collision triggered a verbal spat, which quickly escalated when Mishra began physically assaulting Lokesh with her slipper. In the video that went viral on X (formerly Twitter), Mishra is seen repeatedly hitting the auto driver while he calmly records the confrontation on his mobile phone. The woman can be heard accusing him of misbehaving and injuring her leg during the incident. 'Yeh badtameezi kar raha hai, mera pair kuchla aur uske baad video bana raha hai (He's misbehaving, he crushed my leg and then started recording),' she shouts during the clash. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Switch to UnionBank Rewards Card UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo Lokesh later stated that he began filming the incident because Mishra was arguing in Hindi rather than Kannada, which he felt was inappropriate in the local context. He also claimed the woman initiated the confrontation without provocation. Following the incident, Lokesh filed a formal police complaint at the Bellandur police station. An FIR was registered against Mishra for assault. Originally from Bihar, Mishra currently resides in Bengaluru. The case quickly gained attention not just for the violent outburst but for how it unfolded in a city already known for traffic issues and frequent altercations between commuters and drivers. The story took another turn when a second video surfaced online showing Mishra and her husband issuing a public apology to Lokesh. In a surprising gesture, the couple is seen bowing before him and touching his feet in a traditional form of seeking forgiveness. Mishra claimed she panicked during the incident as she is pregnant and felt unsafe when the auto came too close to their two-wheeler. 'We love Bengaluru, we love the culture, and we love the people,' she said in the video. Public response to the incident has been sharply divided. Some viewers expressed sympathy for Mishra's situation, while others condemned her actions and questioned the increasing trend of using apologies to escape consequences. One user wrote, 'Pregnancy doesn't give you the right to be violent.' Another commented, 'Making a pregnant woman grovel and beg shows how much Kannada society has fallen.' Several pro-Kannada groups also weighed in, staging protests against Mishra and demanding strict action, arguing that cultural disrespect and public aggression cannot be brushed aside with apologies. This incident has once again highlighted issues of civic behavior, linguistic identity, and growing aggression on Indian roads. It also reflects the increasing role of social media in shaping narratives, where moments captured on video can sway public opinion in an instant.