PUNE: A magisterial court here on Sunday ordered the remand of Vivek Sunil Agarwal and his brother Vipul, partners in Alcon Landmarks construction firm, in police custody till July 2 in the Kondhwa wall collapse case.
“The investigators want to establish whether the collapsed retaining wall was an authorized or unauthorized construction,” police told the court, seeking their custody for 10 days.
In a remand report to the court of judicial magistrate first class S S Ramdin, inspector Mahadev Kumbhar also named six other suspects — three each from the Alcon Landmarks and the Kanchan Group — as wanted suspects in the case.
Kumbhar told the magistrate that the arrested duo’s custodial interrogation was critical to establishing the legal aspects involving the construction of the Alcon Stylus apartment complex as well as its retaining wall.
The police have invoked charges under IPC Sections 304 and 34. “The investigators want to arrest the other wanted suspects besides recovering the Alcon Society’s building plan, maps, permission and other relevant documents from the two arrested,” he told the court.
The remand report stated that the Agarwal brothers have so far given evasive replies about the whereabouts of the three suspects from Alcon Landmarks firm, and the police also needed to establish whether there were more persons involved.
Similarly, the investigators wanted to establish the contractor hired to build the compound wall in 2013, the report stated.
Lawyer Sanjay Agarwal, representing the two builders, submitted that custodial remand merely on the basis of suspicion about the legality of the compound wall was not justified nor was the police’s action of invoking culpable homicide charge in the case. “The fact that 15 deaths occurred by itself does not aggravate an offence. If remand is granted on mere suspicion than it would violate the constitutional rights of my clients,” he said, submitting that the case is, at best, an offence of negligence.
In support of his argument, Agarwal cited a 2015 ruling by the Bombay high court in relation to a case where 74 people had lost their lives under similar circumstances. “The police have the option of converting the offence from negligence to culpable homicide if their investigation reveals so, but my clients won’t have any option if they are remanded merely on grounds of suspicion and will lose their constitutional rights,” he added.
“The investigators want to establish whether the collapsed retaining wall was an authorized or unauthorized construction,” police told the court, seeking their custody for 10 days.
In a remand report to the court of judicial magistrate first class S S Ramdin, inspector Mahadev Kumbhar also named six other suspects — three each from the Alcon Landmarks and the Kanchan Group — as wanted suspects in the case.
Kumbhar told the magistrate that the arrested duo’s custodial interrogation was critical to establishing the legal aspects involving the construction of the Alcon Stylus apartment complex as well as its retaining wall.
The police have invoked charges under IPC Sections 304 and 34. “The investigators want to arrest the other wanted suspects besides recovering the Alcon Society’s building plan, maps, permission and other relevant documents from the two arrested,” he told the court.
The remand report stated that the Agarwal brothers have so far given evasive replies about the whereabouts of the three suspects from Alcon Landmarks firm, and the police also needed to establish whether there were more persons involved.
Similarly, the investigators wanted to establish the contractor hired to build the compound wall in 2013, the report stated.
Lawyer Sanjay Agarwal, representing the two builders, submitted that custodial remand merely on the basis of suspicion about the legality of the compound wall was not justified nor was the police’s action of invoking culpable homicide charge in the case. “The fact that 15 deaths occurred by itself does not aggravate an offence. If remand is granted on mere suspicion than it would violate the constitutional rights of my clients,” he said, submitting that the case is, at best, an offence of negligence.
In support of his argument, Agarwal cited a 2015 ruling by the Bombay high court in relation to a case where 74 people had lost their lives under similar circumstances. “The police have the option of converting the offence from negligence to culpable homicide if their investigation reveals so, but my clients won’t have any option if they are remanded merely on grounds of suspicion and will lose their constitutional rights,” he added.
Quick Links
Lok Sabha Election Schedule 2019Lok Sabha Election NewsDelhi Capitals teamMI team 2019Rajasthan Royals 2019RCB team 2019Maharashtra Lok Sabha ConstituenciesBJP Candidate ListBJP List 2019 TamilnaduShiv Sena List 2019AP BJP List 2019Mamata BanerjeeBJP List 2019 MaharashtraPriyanka GandhiBJP List 2019 KarnatakaAMMK Candidate List 2019BJP List 2019 WBLok Sabha Elections in Tamil NaduBSP List 2019 UPNews in TamilLok Sabha Poll 2019Satta Matka 2018PM ModiMahagathbandhanNagpur BJP Candidate ListChandrababu NaiduTamil Nadu ElectionsUrmila MatondkarNews in TeluguMadras High CourtTejashwi YadavArvind KejriwalTejasvi SuryaPawan KalyanArvind KejriwalYogi AdityanathJaya PradaSatta King 2019Srinagar encounter
Get the app