Hyderabad, August 21: A tragic road accident in Hyderabad has resulted in the death of a young woman. Questions have arisen regarding the decision not to arrest the son of Jana Sena MP Lingamaneni Ramesh. In response, the Cyberabad police defended their stance on Friday. They stated that the claims of external pressure influencing the decision not to arrest the accused are false and baseless.
The police clarified that the decision was based on legal provisions, the circumstances of the case, and the evidence available at the time of the investigation.
On Thursday, Cyberabad police reported that a case had been registered against 21-year-old Lingamaneni Sanjus for allegedly causing the death of a woman due to reckless and speeding driving.
The victim, 26-year-old Bharti Mukhi, was working as a sales executive at a lifestyle store in Inorbit Mall, Madhapur, Hyderabad. She was tragically struck by a luxury car while crossing the road on August 16.
Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Rithiraj stated that a case was registered under Section 106(1) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) at the Madhapur police station, and the investigation is ongoing.
According to the DCP, following the registration of the case, the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident was detained, and preliminary tests for alcohol and drugs were conducted. Both tests returned negative results.
Subsequently, blood samples from the driver were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for scientific examination.
The police reported that the car involved in the accident has been seized and sent for inspection by the Motor Vehicle Inspector (MVI). The MVI report is still pending and will be considered as part of the investigation.
The DCP explained that given the facts and circumstances available at the time, Section 106(1) of the IPC was applied, which carries a maximum penalty of five years. Since this offense falls under a category with a punishment of less than seven years, the investigating officer had to consider the need for arrest according to Section 35 of the IPC and the guidelines provided by the Supreme Court in the Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar case.
He emphasized that after a fair evaluation of the available evidence, no circumstances warranted the immediate arrest of the accused. Therefore, a notice was issued under Section 35 of the IPC for the accused to cooperate with the investigation.
The DCP clarified that the procedures followed by the investigating officer were entirely in accordance with the law and the Supreme Court’s directives applicable to cases with penalties of up to seven years.
The police stated that the investigation is still ongoing. If further evidence or the MVI report indicates the necessity for an arrest, appropriate legal action will be taken.
–
Leave a Comment