Mumbai Police presented both the accused in Baba Siddiqui murder case in the court on Sunday. During the hearing in the court, one of the accused Dharamraj Rajesh Kashyap declared himself a minor. He claimed that he was only 17 years old. After this claim of Dharamraj, the prosecution has demanded a bone ossification test of the accused, which has been accepted by the court. At the same time, the court has sent the second accused Gurmel Baljeet Singh to police custody for seven days. After the results of Dharamraj’s bone ossification test come, the court will give its verdict on his custody.
What did Baba Siddiqui’s lawyer say in the court?
The lawyer appearing on behalf of Baba Siddiqui refuted Dharamraj’s claim of being a minor. He said that the police have recovered the Aadhaar cards of both the accused, in which Gurmel is 23 years old and Kashyap is 21 years old. The prosecution said that if the defense lawyer has no problem then bone ossification test of Dharamraj can be done.
Also read: The accused will not be spared, amid demands for resignation What did Eknath Shinde and Devendra Fadnavis say on Baba Siddique Murder Case?
Defense side ready to conduct bone ossification test
The magistrate sought evidence from Siddharth Aggarwal, representing both the accused, in support of Kashyap’s claim of being a minor. On this Aggarwal said that he does not have the birth certificate but he is ready for the bone ossification test.
Also read: Lawrence Bishnoi Gang took responsibility for Baba Siddiqui murder case, also threatened Salman Khan
Demand for 14 days remand, got seven days
The prosecution had demanded to send the accused to police remand for 14 days. The prosecution said, ‘We need 14 days’ remand to investigate this crime.’ He said that the accused are residents of Haryana and UP. He was staying there to do Reiki. Where did he get the guns and where did he learn to use them? Who funded the accused is a matter of investigation. We need 14 days’ remand to investigate all this.
Defense lawyer Siddharth Aggarwal, opposing the demand for 14-day remand, said, ‘Of course the incident is disappointing but it has to be decided whether the accused have done this or not. It is not clear from the prosecution as to who fired the bullet. The deceased was a famous political figure and it is possible that someone else might have done this and the accused are being framed. The demand for 14 days custody is not justified.
