Suneha Pandit’s police custody also continues till Nov 16

Mumbai: Actor Tiger Shroff ’s mother, Ayesha, visited firing victim Umesh Chauhan (34)

Mumbai: A special MCOCA court on Wednesday extended the police custody of five accused in the Tiger Shroff firing case till Nov 16, after the prosecution sought more time to interrogate and confront them with co-accused Suneha Pandit. Of the 13 accused arrested in the case, seven have already been remanded to judicial custody. Suneha Pandit’s police custody also continues till Nov 16.

The five accused whose custody was extended are Phulsingh, also referred to as Phool Singh Kumar, Rehan Ansari alias Suka, Kunal Jaminsingh, Sumit Sarolia and Ankit alias Sarpanch Khatak.

Earlier, the police had told the court that transactions of around Rs 28,000 were traced in Oct alone through the SBI account linked to Suneha Pandit, sister-in-law of alleged gang leader Anil Pandit. Suneha was arrested from Haryana last week and remanded to police custody till Nov 16. Meanwhile, a police team has left for Haryana and the age verification report of Phulsingh is expected to be submitted to the court on Nov 18. Phulsingh claimed the age recorded by police was incorrect and that his actual age was 17. The defence claimed the date of birth was Nov 30, 2008, which would make Phulsingh a minor on the date of the alleged offence. The defence relied on a birth certificate issued by a competent authority in Haryana and an Aadhaar card, both of which allegedly record the date of birth as Nov 30, 2008.

Phulsingh told the court that the police had been informed earlier, but that the accused was allegedly told not to say anything. Investigators alleged the account was used to route extortion and crypto funds to co-accused. The defence also sought verification of the documents from the issuing authorities and production of the original birth register entry from Haryana.

The defence submitted that Phulsingh had not disclosed his age earlier out of fear of the police and had not received a proper opportunity to speak to a lawyer during earlier proceedings.

The court directed the investigating officer to conduct an inquiry into the claim of juvenility.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *