BT Road incident of 2009 : Judgments reserved
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, March 29 2016: Imphal West Sessions Judge Maibam Manoj today reserved judgments on suspended Head Constable Th Herojit's confessional statement regarding the death of Chungkham Sanjit in an alleged fake encounter and the writ petition filed by Sanjit's mother Chungkham Taratombi till tomorrow.

Arguments among the counsels of Taratombi, Herojit and CBI continued for around two hours in the Court today.

It may be mentioned that Herojit had submitted a confessional statement in the form of an affidavit to the Court some time back.

After Herojit's confession of killing Sanjit in a 'fake encounter,' Chungkham Taratombi submitted an application to the Court to order CBI to conduct a fresh investigation of the July 23 BT road bazar incident.

Th Herojit with womenfolk coming out from the Court

During today's hearing, Taratombi's counsel told the Court that there are some judgments passed by higher Courts wherein an under-trial case can be further investigated under Section 173 (B) .

The counsel also requested the Court to direct CBI to carry out further investigation into the July 23, 2009 BT Road incident in view of Herojit's confession to find out whether the individuals mentioned by the suspended cop were involved in the killing of Sanjit.

Herojit's counsel also requested the Court to record the statement of the cop regarding his statement submitted in the form of an affidavit.

He also pleaded the Court to direct CBI to conduct further investigation as Herojit had claimed that he killed Sanjit to follow the order of his superior officer.

The counsel further said that there are certain provisions of the law under which the Court can direct the investigating agency/officer to conduct further investigation or take up a suo moto case.

CBI counsel told the Court that the investigating agency never remained silent on the case but it has been assessing the new developments ever since Herojit made his confessional statement.

However, it would be subjudice to act without a Court order at this point of time, he said.

The counsel argued why Herojit had not disclosed anything about the incident earlier.

His prolonged silence had delayed the case, he observed.

He further said that CBI would act on Taratombi's petition only after the investigating agency receives a Court order.

Another counsel of CBI submitted that the petitioner and the accused may approach the higher Court for reinvestigation of the case.

He also said that the statement made by Th Herojit before CBI and his confessional statement made before the media contradicts one another.

The third counsel of CBI argued that Herojit's confessional affidavit cannot be considered as a fresh evidence as he remained mum for many years.

Human Right Alert director Babloo Loitongbam appeared before the Court as CBI prosecution witness number 75 of the case.

The Court fixed April 15 as the next date of hearing of the case.