CHANDIGARH: Most of the prosecution witnesses in the infamous Katia kidnapping and molestation have retraced from their previous ‘statements made to the police as the Additional District Attorney, Mr. Par deep Mehta sought appointment of a commission to visit France to record the statement of the alleged
The case was taken up the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Mr. Shekhar Dhawan following the Punjab and Haryana High Court directive transferring it from Ropar courts to the CIM here.
The case pertains to an incident in which Mr, Gurkirat Singh, grandson of the former Punjab chief Minister Mr. Beant Singh and six others had been caused of kidnapping and molesting the French tourist Ms. Katia Demand on the night of August 31, 1994.
Mr. Amrik Singh, the auto rickshaw driver who transported Ms, Katia and her two friends, Mr. Phillips and Mr. James from Chandigarh to Mohali disclosed that the trio were dead drunk and were on a “kissing spree,” He had to tell them to behave but in vain.
The DSP, Mr. Raj Vilochan, then looking after the CM’s security, disclosed that the Gypsy in which Ms. Katia was allegedly kidnapped, had as per the record gone to Delhi with the VIP grandson and his security guards, Jasbir Singh and Sukhwinder Singh.
Mr. TN. Sharma, the counter clerk of the Aroma Hotel room where the episode of kidnapping allegedly started, testified that whatever he had told the police earlier was correct and he stood by his statement, He however, refused to recognize Gurkirat and others who were present in the court.
Mr. Khogin, a chowkidar in the factory of the Mr. Inderjit Singh, where Ms. Katia was allegedly kept for the night stated that no incident took place in the factory on the night of August 31.
Mr. Alok Sen Gupta, counsel for the accused, cross-examined the prosecution witnesses and tried to point out the chinks in police story.
In an interesting turn of events, consolable Nirmal Singh who was an official driver of the Gypsy involved in the incident said that he had left the residence of the slain CM around 8 pm and he could not recall anything beyond that. Initially, he also refused to identify constable Jasbir Singh and ‘Suk winder Singh who were present in the court but when the judge put the accused in dock, he recognized the two body guards, The prosecution has listed 54 witnesses out of which 20 have been examined including the six examined this day.
Article extracted from this publication >> December 1, 1995