Ryan murder case: SC refuses to cancel anticipatory bail granted to school founders

The petitioner had demanded cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the trustees by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on November 21.

By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Published: December 12, 2017 3:19 am
Ryan murder case, Pradyuman Thakur murder case, School trustees anticipatory bail, Supreme Court, Ryan International school, Gurgaon school, India news, indian express news Supreme Court

The Supreme Court Monday refused to cancel anticipatory bail granted to three trustees of the Ryan International Group — Ryan Pinto, Grace Pinto and Augustine Francis Pinto — in connection with the death of a seven-year-old boy at the Bhondsi branch of the school in September.

“In our considered opinion, without expressing anything on the merits of the case as the investigation is still under progress and the CBI is yet to come to a conclusion regarding the involvement of the private respondents in the crime, the private respondents herein have made out a case for grant of protection by way of interim bail till the presentation of challan by the CBI as has been passed by learned single Judge. Therefore, the order passed by learned single Judge granting interim bail to the answering respondents till the presentation of challan cannot be faulted with,” a bench of Justice R K Agrawal and Justice A M Sapre said, dismissing a petition filed by the deceased boy’s father Barun Chandra Thakur.

The petitioner had demanded cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the trustees by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on November 21. The court said a perusal of the FIR registered by the police, which was re-registered by the CBI, did not reveal any allegation against the three.

“As the CBI is yet to analyse the role of the private respondents in this case and there is no evidence of their complicity in the crime, and there is not even a pointer of involvement of respondents herein in the alleged crime. Their involvement cannot be established until and unless, there is some substantial evidence against them”, the court had said.