Dharamsala, Aug 18 (IANS) The voice of Rajendra Kachru, father of Himachal Pradesh’s medical student Aman Kachru who was ragged-to-death in 2009, will now be heard in a local court where the four accused in the case are facing trial.
Fast Track Court Judge Purinder Vaidya Wednesday allowed the prosecution to examine Rajendra Kachru as the victim had reportedly told him about the ragging incident that took place March 6, 2009, in the Rajendra Prasad Medical College in Tanda town near here.
Special Public Prosecutor Jiwan Lal Sharma told IANS this was for the first in the case that the victim’s father has been summoned. He will be examined Aug 28.
He said Rajendra Kachru’s examination was important as Aman’s roommate Ashish Saklani informed the trial court that the victim spoke at length with his father about the ragging incident.
He said the court Wednesday also allowed the re-examination of two doctors — Harjeet Pal Singh, registrar, ENT (ear, nose and throat) department, and D.P. Swami, assistant professor, forensic medicine department.
‘There was some ambiguity in the statements recorded by the both. So, to clear the confusion, we sought their re-examination,’ he added.
Singh was on duty in the hospital when he examined Aman’s ears a few hours after the ragging incident, whereas Swami conducted the post-mortem examination on Aman’s body.
Both the doctors have been summoned Aug 27.
Aman, 19, died March 8, 2009, a few hours after being allegedly ragged by the four final-year students of the college.
The court has already recorded the statement of 37 witnesses, comprising doctors and police personnel.
The court Aug 2 resumed the trial against four medical students – Ajay Verma, Naveen Verma, Abhinav Verma and Mukul Sharma – after they surrendered on cancellation of their bail by the Himachal Pradesh High Court.
The high court, which had initiated suo motu proceedings after bail was granted to them July 17, said: ‘The order passed by the trial court granting bail to the accused is against law… accordingly quashed and set aside.’
‘The trial court would ensure that the trial is conducted from day to day. The court would ensure that no undue and unnecessary adjournments are granted to either side,’ Justice D.D. Sud observed in a 37-page order.
