Murder of Pradyuman Thakur

Last updated

Death of Pradyuman Thakur
Date8 September 2017
Time8:05 AM
Venue Ryan International School, Gurugram
Location Gurugram, Haryana, India
Coordinates 28°27′N77°03′E / 28.45°N 77.05°E / 28.45; 77.05
Cause Homicide by slitting to throat
MotiveTo delay the parents meeting and school examination
First reporterUnnamed students
OutcomeDeath of a class 2 student
Deaths1
Arrests1
Suspects2

Pradyuman Thakur was a seven-year-old student at Ryan International School, in Gurugram, in the state of Haryana, India. His body was found with injuries to the neck outside a washroom at the school on 8 September 2017, and he later succumbed to his wounds. A bus conductor who provided assistance with carrying the injured Pradyuman was initially charged with the murder, and allegedly confessed to police, but was later found to be innocent. Four police officers were later charged with framing him for the murder. Following a transfer of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation, an unnamed sixteen year old student from the same school has since been charged with his murder. The case is still going on, and the trial proceedings have not begun as of December 2021.

Contents

Thakur's death attracted widespread public concern and criticism for the conditions regarding safety in schools in Delhi NCR. A number of government reviews of Ryan International School's functioning were conducted following the investigation into Thakur's death, and revised guidelines for safety in schools were issued by both, the State and the Union governmental bodies.

Murder

On 8 September 2017, Barun Chandra Thakur drove his 7 year old son, Pradyuman, and 11 year old daughter Vidhi, to Ryan International School, in Gurugram, Haryana, where both children were students. Thakur later stated that he had begun driving his children to school instead of sending them by school bus, because of safety concerns. [1]

Thakur left his children at the school gates at 7:55 a.m. At 8:08 a.m., several students alerted school staff that Pradyuman had been injured, and was bleeding from two neck wounds, outside a washroom near his classroom, on the ground floor of the building. [2] [3] Staff members asked a school bus conductor, Ashok Kumar, to assist them with carrying Pradyuman to a car belonging to one of the school teachers, and drove Pradyuman to a nearby hospital in Badshahpur. He was transferred from there to Artemis Hospital in Gurugram, where he was declared dead on arrival. [2] [4] [5]

Pradyuman's parents, Barun and Jhyoti Thakur, were contacted by the school authorities after he was found, at 8:15 a.m, and went directly to the hospital where he had been taken. They later stated to press that school officials had not informed them about the injuries their son had suffered, and that the police had not been called by the school, but instead had been called by themselves. [5]

Several hundreds attended the last rites for Pradyuman, who was cremated with police protection, in Gurugram. [6]

Investigation

Haryana Police Investigation

Initial investigation and arrest of Ashok Kumar

The Haryana State Police were alerted about the incident by Pradyuman's parents, and arrived at the school at 11:30 AM on the same day. [2] Police officials stated to media that a blood stained knife was recovered from the area where Pradyuman was found, and a police forensics team examined the area and collected evidence, including fingerprints, from the area. [5] CCTV footage recovered from the hallway near the scene of the crime showed Pradyuman attempting to crawl out of the washroom, while bleeding from the neck, before collapsing in the hallway. [7] Police detained and questioned ten persons, and observed blood stains on the shirt of Ashok Kumar, the school bus conductor who had assisted with carrying Pradyuman to a car which took him to the hospital. [5] A cellphone video recorded by a witness at the scene of the crime showed school authorities asking Kumar to help pick up Pradyuman to transport him to the hospital. [7] Kumar was arrested by the Haryana Police in connection with the murder at 12 noon, on the same day. [5]

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Sumit Kumar, stated that Kumar had arrived with a school bus at 7:50 AM and had gone to the ground floor washroom in the school building, which was commonly used by staff and students. According to the police, he was carrying a knife that he had found in the bus tool kit, and had gone to the washroom to rinse off the knife before taking it home for his own use. When Pradyuman entered the washroom, the police suggested that Kumar attempted to sexually assault Pradyuman, and on meeting with resistance, had attempted to murder him with the knife, which was left behind at the scene of the crime. [5] [8] Haryana Police also initially told a Gurugram court that they believed an additional suspect was involved, and that an attempt had been made to tamper with the crime scene. However, this statement was contradicted by a senior police official who stated to the press that "Only Ashok has murdered Pradyuman, no other person is involved." [4] Police officials alleged that Kumar had confessed to the murder while in custody. [4] [9]

Release of Ashok Kumar

The arrest of Ashok was met with public doubts and concern, including from Pradyuman Thakur's family. [10] [11] Thakur's mother stated later that she had believed the conductor was being framed. [12] Saurabh Raghav, a bus driver working for Ryan International School on the bus which Ashok Kumar conducted, later stated that he was pressured by the Gurugram Police to state that the knife found at the scene of the murder was part of the bus tool kit. [13] A medical examination of Pradyuman Thakur's body ruled out any sexual assault. [7] [14] Another witness, a school gardener named Harpal Singh, who was one of the first on the scene to find Pradyuman, stated that he had not seen any bloodstains on Kumar's clothes before he assisted with picking up Pradyuman to take him to hospital. [7] Harpal Singh also stated that he had also been repeatedly physically assaulted by the police in an attempt to force him to confess to the murder. [7]

Kumar maintained publicly that he was innocent and had not committed the murder. [9] He later stated that he had been tortured by the Haryana Police while in custody, and that he had confessed to prevent being further tortured. Kumar stated that he was denied food for two days while in custody, and was repeatedly slapped and beaten by police officials. [15]

On 15 September 2017, the case was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation, a federal investigative agency, after Pradyuman's parents petitioned the state government and the Supreme Court of India. The CBI assumed custody of the persons arrested by the Haryana Police, including Thakur, and reopened the investigation. [16] [17] On 7 November 2017, the CBI arrested an unnamed student for the murder of Pradyuman Thakur. The Central Bureau of Investigation subsequently cleared Kumar of any involvement in the murder. [18] [19]

Following this, on 22 November 2017, Kumar was granted bail by a District Court in Gurugram. [20] [21] On 28 February 2018, Kumar was acquitted of all charges relating to the murder of Pradyuman Thakur by a special court. [22]

At the time of Kumar's arrest, a Bar Association of lawyers in Gurugram had passed a resolution stating that its members would not defend Kumar against the accusations of murder of Pradyuman Thakur. The Bar Association subsequently retracted their position when he was released on bail after being cleared by the CBI. Kumar's family stated that he had eventually been able to obtain legal representation after reaching out through personal connections. [23] The Supreme Court subsequently disciplined the Bar Association for this resolution. [24]

Following Ashok Kumar's release, the Haryana Police stated that while Ashok Kumar had been arrested as part of an ongoing investigation, and that no charges had been filed against him at the time. [25] The National Human Rights Commission ordered the Haryana Police to compensate Kumar for the wrongful arrest, but he declined to accept, terming the compensation to be insufficient. Kumar has sought legal action against the police officers who arrested him. [26] [27] In January 2021, four police officers of the Gurugram Police were charged with framing Ashok Kumar, by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The charges including offences relating to falsifying documents, torture, and criminal conspiracy. They have not yet been arrested on these charges, as of November 2021. [28] [29]

CBI Investigation

Transfer of Investigation to CBI

The initial investigation of the murder by Gurugram Police was met with wide public criticism, including by Pradyuman's father, Barun Thakur. Barun Thakur filed a petition at the Supreme Court, asking for the investigation to be transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). [30] [31] On 15 September 2017, Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar announced that the case had been transferred to the CBI in response to requests by the parents of Pradyuman Thakur, although he affirmed that in his view, the investigation had been correctly handled by the Haryana Police. [8] The Haryana Police also denied any mishandling of the investigation, stating that their findings were preliminary and that the investigation had still been ongoing when it was transferred to the CBI. [16] Pradyuman Thakur's family stated that they had asked the CBI to investigate the possibility of the involvement of other students at the school in Pradyuman's death, as they had received information that some older students had consumed alcohol in the presence of younger students and had threatened the younger students to prevent them from telling school authorities. [10]

Investigation

The CBI sent a forensic team to the school to review the evidence and scene of crime independently from the Haryana Police investigation on 22 September 2017 . [17] They took over custody of the persons arrested by the Haryana Police. [17] Following their investigation, the CBI identified a different knife as the murder weapon, stating that they had recovered it from the scene of the crime and that it had been hidden inside one of the washrooms. This contradicted the Haryana Police's statement that a knife recovered at the scene of the crime, and identified as part of the school bus tool kit, was the murder weapon. [19] The CBI also reviewed CCTV footage from the crime scene and found that there were some students visible in the footage apart from Pradyuman Thakur. The CBI worked with the school administration to identify these students and then questioned them. [32] They re-examined forensic evidence and found no evidence that Ashok Kumar, the bus conductor arrested by the Haryana Police, was involved in the murder. A forensic investigation by the CBI found that Pradyuman's body had bloodstains that were not matched to himself, and that Kumar was also ruled out forensically as a match. The CBI also stated that the Haryana Police's claim that a semen sample had been found on Pradyuman's body and had been sent for testing could not be confirmed, and that they could not find any evidence that such a sample had been found or tested. [33]

Arrest of Unnamed Student for Murder

On 7 November 2017, the CBI arrested an unnamed class XI student, aged 16, from Ryan International School for Pradyuman Thakur's murder. [34] The student was one of the first on the scene of the crime, and had informed school authorities that another student had been injured. [3] The Haryana Police later stated that while they had questioned the unnamed student as a witness immediately after the murder, they had found no evidence suggesting that he was responsible for the death of Pradyuman Thakur at the time. [25]

Following the arrest of the unnamed student, the Juvenile Justice Board, a state body constituted under the Juvenile Justice Act to determine whether juveniles arrested of offenses should be tried as children or adults, gave the CBI permission to interrogate the student. [35] Based on CCTV footage, the CBI questioned the unnamed student, who could be seen on the footage exiting the washroom around the time that the crime was committed. [19] The CBI also stated later that cellphone records and forensic evidence were used in order to identify the student. [19] Following the arrest, the CBI also took the arrested unnamed student back to the school and recreated the scene of the crime. [19] [36] The CBI stated that they were able to establish that the knife recovered from the washroom had been purchased by the unnamed student at a local market, a few days earlier. [35] They also seized his computer and phone and stated that the student's social media was being investigated for evidence regarding the crime. [37]

The CBI further stated to a Juvenile Court in Gurugram that on questioning, the unnamed student had confessed to the murder, in the presence of his father, independent witnesses, and a juvenile welfare officer. [38] The CBI stated that the student had not been performing well academically, and had been unable to write a scheduled exam on the day of the murder. He was also reported to have three more examinations and a parent-teacher meeting scheduled for that week. [3] A statement from the CBI indicated that they believed the unnamed student killed Pradyuman to postpone his examinations and parent-teacher meetings at the school. [39] [34] A CBI official stated to press that the student "...believed that a sensational act would either force the school to shut down for a few days or create enough disruption to cancel the exams and the parent-teacher meeting." [35] The CBI has initially stated that they believe that the choice of victim was random. [40] The unnamed student was quoted as later confirming to the Juvenile Justice Board that he knew Pradyuman as they attended the same music class. [41] The unnamed student's parent's have subsequently accused the CBI of torturing their son in order to elicit a false confession from him. [18] [42]

Arrest of school authorities for negligence

Following the murder of Pradyuman Thakur, parents of several students filed a police complaint stating that the school had been negligent in maintaining security measures, and particularly pointed out a collapsed boundary wall that allowed access to school grounds, as well as several dysfunctional CCTVs on the school premises, resulting in the arrest of several school officials. [43] A team of Haryana Police travelled to Mumbai to investigate the owners of Ryan International School. [43]

The founders of the Ryan Group of Schools, Augustine and Grace Pinto, and their son, Ryan Pinto, applied for and were denied anticipatory bail at the Bombay High Court, with Pradyuman Thakur's father filing an application to the court opposing their plea. [44] They were also denied anticipatory bail from the Punjab and Haryana High Court. [45] On appeal to the Supreme Court, senior officials and owners of the Ryan International School were granted a bail order, and the Supreme Court described the proceedings against them as a 'media trial'. [46] Ryan International School management made a motion to the Supreme Court to transfer the case outside Haryana to ensure a fair trial. The court began hearing the case on 18 September 2017. [4]

The Central Board of Secondary Education investigated Ryan International School, and reported to the Supreme Court that school authorities had been negligent in maintaining safety and security conditions on the school premises. The CBSE further found that the school had failed to report the incident to the police when it occurred, and that the police had been contacted by the victim's family. [47]

Trial

In order to determine how the trial would proceed, the Juvenile Justice Board set up a committee which included a psychologist from the Pandit Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences (PGIMS, Rohtak) for an expert opinion on the accused unnamed student. [48] On 11 November 2017, the unnamed student was placed in a juvenile home for observation, following an order from a juvenile court in Gurugram. [18] The Court had also appointed a welfare officer to act as a liaison for the unnamed student. [18] The Juvenile Justice Board is responsible for determining whether the unnamed student would be tried as an adult or a juvenile. If tried as a juvenile, in accordance with the Juvenile Justice Act 2015, the unnamed student can only be remanded to a correctional facility for youth where he will remain until the age of 21, after which he may be transferred to jail to complete a sentence of punishment. In such a case, he cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment or the death penalty. [39] If tried as an adult, he would face the normal conditions of trial under the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure.

After conducting evaluations on the unnamed student's mental and physical state, the Juvenile Justice Board declared on 20 December 2017, that he would be treated as an adult and undergo a regular trial in court. [49] The Juvenile Justice Board noted that the student "...had the adequate ability to understand the consequences of his acts." [39] The Board had also ordered an investigation into the unnamed student's conduct, based on allegations that his behavior in school had been "aggressive". [48] The Board also heard an application from Pradyuman Thakur's family, asking that the unnamed student be tried as an adult. [48]

In 2018, the Punjab and Haryana High Court heard an appeal against the decision of the JJB to have the unnamed student tried as an adult. They remanded the matter back to the JJB for reconsideration. An appeal was filed against this decision at the Supreme Court, which stayed all proceedings in the case until it had determined the question of whether the student should be tried as a juvenile or adult. As of November 2021, the trial proceedings are yet to begin, as the Supreme Court has not made a decision in this regard. [29] In October 2022, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to the unnamed accused. [50]

Public Response

The news of Pradyuman's murder resulted in protests by parents at the Ryan International School and several people were subsequently arrested for vandalizing school property. [5] Police officials responded with a baton charge on the protesters, and one police official was subsequently suspended in connection with this. [43] [51] Barun Thakur appealed for peace, publicly accused the school of being negligent regarding the safety of the students, and moved the Supreme Court of India for an investigation into the school, as well as for a transfer of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation. [30] [43] A police force was deployed inside and around the school in response to the anxious parents who barged into the school and began throwing furniture as well as breaking glass awards cases. [52] In response to these protests, the Chief Minister of Haryana, Manohar Lal Khattar, assured parents that strict action would be taken against the criminal. [53]

On 11 September 2017, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Central Government, the Haryana Government, and the Central Board of Secondary Education after the child's father, Barun Thakur, petitioned for a CBI probe into his son's murder and into the safety guidelines for children in school. Following this, two officials of the Ryan International School were arrested after an investigation pointed out serious security lapses. For example, most of the school's closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras were not working, and there was no CCTV camera in the area of the incident.[ citation needed ]

Ryan International School principal was reinstated at another branch after a short suspension. Neerja Batra was placed as a teacher at a school in Gurugram's sector 40 by Deputy Commissioner, Vinay Pratap Singh. This relocation by the administration angered Thakur's parents who called the principal "irresponsible". Since Batra revealed the insufficient security, and had no financial resources to deal with the situation herself, she was deemed not responsible for the murder of the young child.[ citation needed ]

Due to the incident, many students have come forward with stories of violence conducted by their teachers and principal. As a result, many measures have been taken by the Ryan Group, such as: metal detectors in school, female security guards, bathrooms not being open between school periods, and parents not being allowed to enter the school during school hours.[ citation needed ]

Policies Regarding School Safety

Following the murder of Pradyuman Thakur, the Haryana government instituted a number of policies aimed at improving school safety. Mandatory police checks on school staff, including transport staff were instituted. [43] The Ministry of Human Resources and Development announced an initiative to train school teachers to address mental health issues following the murder. [54]

In 2018, director and screenwriter Vishal Bhardwaj stated that he would be making a film based on the murder of Pradyuman Thakur. [55]

A Book named "The Mysterious Killer of Class 2 Student" written by B. R. Sekar has been published on August 5, 2018. [56] The book contains a similar plot to the incident.The story analyses all aspects of the real case and concludes that it was an accident rather than a Murder. In the real case also, it is a wonder why the investigation agencies are not trying to look into the angle of accident.

A documentary series named "A Big Little Murder" [57] directed by Mayurica Biswas was released on Netflix at August 2021. However, The Delhi high court has restrained the platform from showing the documentary. The ruling was done in favor of the Gurugram based Ryan International School, who pleaded against the streaming of the documentary. The court ruled as "The defendants are restrained from streaming, broadcasting, telecasting etc. the documentary titled "A Big Little Murder" or any of its abridged versions. The court clarify that the defendants may stream the said documentary after deleting all references to the plaintiff school in question and deleting the portion where the building of the school is depicted". [58] As of January 2022, the documentary is now available on Netflix Australia.[ citation needed ]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Central Bureau of Investigation</span> Crime investigating agency of India

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is the domestic crime investigating agency of India. It operates under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions. Originally set up to investigate bribery and governmental corruption, in 1965 it received expanded jurisdiction to investigate breaches of central laws enforceable by the Government of India, multi-state organised crime, multi-agency or international cases. The CBI has attracted numerous controversies and criticisms due to various reports of irregular practises, excessive political influence, and a poor conviction rate. CBI is exempted from the provisions of the Right to Information Act. CBI is India's officially designated single point of contact for liaison with the Interpol.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gurgaon</span> City in Haryana, India

Gurgaon, officially named Gurugram, is a satellite city and administrative headquarters of Gurgaon district, located in the northern Indian state of Haryana. It is situated near the Delhi–Haryana border, about 30 kilometres (19 mi) southwest of the national capital New Delhi and 268 km (167 mi) south of Chandigarh, the state capital. It is one of the major satellite cities of Delhi and is part of the National Capital Region of India. As of 2011, Gurgaon had a population of 876,969.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bhupinder Singh Hooda</span> 9th Chief Minister of Haryana

Bhupinder Singh Hooda is an Indian National Congress politician who is the current Leader of the Opposition in Haryana Legislative Assembly. He also served as the Chief Minister of Haryana from 2005 to 2014.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ryan International Group of Institutions</span> Group of private educational institutions in India

Ryan International Schools are a group of private educational institutions in India and other countries. The group was founded in 1976 by Dr. Augustine Francis Pinto under FLDS. The Ryan Group started its first school in Mumbai in 1976 and currently has more than 135 schools in India and other countries including significant locations in Maharashtra, Delhi-NCR, and Karnataka. The group collaborates with universities in the US to facilitate learning across global boundaries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh</span> Former social reformer, preacher, and spiritual leader who was convicted of murder and rape

Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Insan, known also as MSG, is the head of the Indian social group Dera Sacha Sauda (DSS) since 1990. He is a religious leader, social worker, actor, singer, writer, songwriter, director, and composer. In addition to a 2017 rape conviction, he was also convicted of being involved in the murder of journalist Ram Chander Chhatrapati.

The multi-billion rupee Gurgaon kidney scandal came to light in January 2008 when police arrested several people for running a kidney transplant racket in Gurgaon, an industrial township near New Delhi, India. Kidneys from most of the victims, who were the poor hailing from the nearby western Uttar Pradesh, were transplanted into clients from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Greece. The police raid was prompted by complaints by the locals from Moradabad about illegal kidney sales. The man accused of the scandal, Amit Kumar, was arrested in Nepal on 7 February 2008 and has denied any hand in criminal activity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Manesar</span> Town in Haryana, India

Manesar is a town and municipal corporation, known as New Gurugram City in the Gurugram district of the state of Haryana, India and a part of the National Capital Region (NCR) of Delhi. It is an Industrial Model Township home to factories and industrial activity from multinational corporations.

The Ruchika Girhotra case involves the molestation of 14-year-old Ruchika Girhotra in 1990 by the Inspector General of Police Shambu in Haryana, India. After she made a complaint, the victim, her family, and her friends were systematically harassed by the police leading to her eventual suicide. On 22 December 2009, after 19 years, 40 adjournments, and more than 400 hearings, the court finally pronounced Rathore guilty under Section 354 IPC (molestation) and sentenced him to six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,000. The CBI had opposed Rathore's plea and had sought an enhancement of his sentence from six months to the maximum of two years after his conviction. Rejecting his appeal against his conviction by a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) special court, Chandigarh District Court on 25 May sentenced the disgraced former police official to one-and-a-half years of rigorous imprisonment, enhancing his earlier six-month sentence and immediately taken into custody and taken to the Burail prison. On 11 November 2010, the Supreme Court granted bail to S.P.S. Rathore on the condition that he remain in Chandigarh. Recently, the Supreme Court of India upheld Rathore's conviction in molestation case but restricted the punishment to six months' jail already served by him considering his age.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Badshahpur</span> City in Haryana, India

Badshapur is one of the 4 sub-division of Gurugram district of Haryana state, situated on the Gurugram-Sohna road (NH-248A). It is named after the Badshahpur Fort, which in turn was the abode of the wife of Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar. Badshahpur is a part of Badshahpur assembly constituency of Haryana having majority of Rao Sahabs/Ahirs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tirath Das Dogra</span> Indian forensic pathologist

Tirath Das Dogra is an Indian forensic pathologist and former Pro-Chancellor and vice-chancellor of SGT University, Budhera Gurgaon Haryana 2013–2017. He is a former director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) New Delhi and an authority on forensic medicine. Dogra was a member of the Medical Council of India from December 2013 till its dissolution in September 2018. Dogra was President of National Medicos Organisation Delhi State from 2012 to 2017. He was a member of the TEQ-Equivalence committee and the Administration and Grievance committee of the Medical Council of India. He was a member of the Advisory committee on MOOC's program of University Grants Commission of India New Delhi. Dogra was emeritus professor of forensic medicine and forensic sciences, professor of Andragogy and educational philosophy and advisor, Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) at SGT University Gurgaon till January 2022. Prof. T D Dogra is a member of the Rehabilitation Council of India.

<i>AJL-National Herald Panchkula land grab case</i>

AJL-National Herald Panchkula land grab scam case, allegedly against Bhupinder Singh Hooda currently in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, is under investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED). This case pertains to Hooda's alleged role for misusing his position as then Chief Minister of Haryana to cause wrongful gains to the Associated Journals Limited (AJL) and corresponding loss to the Government of Haryana, by illegally allotting a government plot of land worth several crores rupees (billions) to AJL for INR 59 lakh. Then Chief Minister, Hooda, was also the chairman of HUDA, a government entity which re-allotted the plot to AJL in 2005 in violations of rules and against the advice of the HUDA officials. Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar's BJP government of Haryana transferred the case to CBI, and CBI filed the FIR in April 2016. CBI booked Hooda for criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, cheating and misuse of official position by public servants. AJL, which also owns National Herald, is controlled by the Indian National Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi among others.

<i>Sonepat-Kharkhoda IMT land case</i>

Sonepat-Kharkhoda Industrial Model Township land case being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Bhupinder Singh Hooda. This under-investigation scam pertains to acquisition of 700 acre land in 3 villages near Kharkhoda in Sonepat district for the Industrial Model Township.. Punjab and Haryana High Court in March 2013 and the Supreme Court of India in May 2016 had cancelled the government's decision to release land to the private builder. Two senior officials in then Chief Minister Hooda's office were indicted for allegedly favouring the developers. Subsequently, in 2018 the Government of Haryana referred the case to CBI to investigate the against Hooda and others.

<i>Haryana Raxil drug purchase case</i>

Haryana Raxil drug purchase scam case is a case under investigation by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Bhupinder Singh Hooda for the illegal purchase of Raxil fungicide which resulted in INR80 crore loss to the government. This scam, initially exposed by Ashok Khemka, is also pending in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

<i>Haryana Forestry case</i> Multi-crore fake plantation scam

Haryana Forestry scam case is a multi-crore fake plantation scam allegedly involving Bhupinder Singh Hooda, Kiran Chaudhary and others where government money was embezzled. In 2009, this scam was exposed by the whistleblower, Sanjiv Chaturvedi, Ramon Magsaysay Award-winner Indian Forest Service officer with then Government of Haryana, who filed a case in September 2012 to seek Supreme Court's instructions to CBI to investigate the case. Earlier, Haryana Government had suspended him in 2007 for acting against illegal felling of trees and poaching in Saraswati Wildlife Sanctuary, but his suspension was revoked by the President in 2008 and the chargesheet was overturned in 2011 on an appeal against the decision of Haryana government. An inquiry committee of the Ministry of Environment & Forest (MoEF) found Chaturvedi's allegations against Haryana government true, preferred an inquiry by Central Vigilance Commission and by CBI into dubious role of certain highly placed politicians and civil servants. CBI, in its reply to CVC, found Chaturvedi's allegations against then Haryana Government creditable enough for an independent inquiry. As per the rules, CBI can not undertake suo motu investigation, only state government, high court or supreme court can ask CBI for it.

<i>Gurugram Rajiv Gandhi Trust land grab case</i> Indian political case

Gurugram Rajiv Gandhi Trust land grab case against Robert Vadra and Bhupinder Singh Hooda is being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) as per Supreme Court of India's order. In the Gurugram Rajiv Gandhi Trust land grab scam between 2004 and 2014, then Government of Haryana administration of Indian National Congress's Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda, had handed over panchayat land to the Rajiv Gandhi Charitable Trust in the name of public interest use, resulting in this trust being sued by the gram panchayat in Punjab and Haryana High Court against the land grabbing of the Gandhi family by the Hooda government. Then Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda. who also held the charge of Panchayat department at that time, had approved the grant of 5.3 acre panchayat land to Rajiv Gandhi Trust for 33 years at a rate of Rs 3 lakh per acre in January 2010, trust applied for the change of land use on 3 December 2010, which was approved on the same day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Muzaffarpur shelter case</span> Incident of sexual assault in Bihars shelter home.

Muzaffarpur Shelter Home Rape case refers to a shelter home that ran under a non-governmental organization called "Sewa Sankalp Evam Vikas Samiti" at Muzaffarpur, Bihar, where cases of sexual abuse, rape and torture were reported. In a medical examination, sexual abuse of 34 out of 42 of the girls living at the shelter was confirmed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Asra Garg</span>

Asra Garg is an Indian Police Service officer from the 2004 batch of Tamil Nadu Cadre.In 2023, Garg was posted as Additional Commissioner of Police, Law and Order (L&O), Chennai North in The Tamil Nadu Police.

On 14 September 2020, a 19-year-old Dalit woman was allegedly gang-raped in Hathras district, Uttar Pradesh, India, by four upper caste men. She died two weeks later in a Delhi hospital.

Manav Singh ; was a 17-year-old boy from Gurugram, India, who committed suicide after being falsely accused of sexual harassment by Bhavleen Kaur on her Instagram stories. The boy committed suicide by jumping off the 11th floor balcony of his home on May 4, 2020. Following the allegations, he was bullied, shamed, and receiving threats.

References

  1. ↑ "Ryan student murder case: Put faith in school, didn't expect it to backfire, says father". The Indian Express. 14 September 2017. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  2. 1 2 3 Kumar, Kunal (12 September 2017). "Ryan murder: Blow-by-blow account of how Pradyuman Thakur was killed in his Gurgaon school". India Today. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  3. 1 2 3 "Ryan school murder case: Boy who 'found body' could not write exam that day". The Indian Express. 10 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  4. 1 2 3 4 "Boy Was Carried By Alleged Killer After Being Found, Say Cops: 10 Points". NDTV. 13 September 2017.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "Gurugram school murder probe as it happened: Police to prepare chargesheet within 7 days, request for fast track trial". Firstpost. 9 September 2017. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  6. ↑ "Gurugram school murder: At cremation, a father's struggle to light the pyre". The Indian Express. 10 September 2017. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 "CBI to probe Ryan school murder: List of unsolved puzzles surrounding gruesome murder of Pradyuman Thakur". The Indian Express. 16 September 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  8. 1 2 "Pradyuman Thakur murder: Case handed over to CBI, Haryana govt to take over Ryan school management". The Indian Express. 15 September 2017. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  9. 1 2 Behl, Abhishek (11 September 2017). "Ryan murder: Accused showed no suspicious behaviour after incident, says bus driver". The Hindustan Times.
  10. 1 2 "Ryan school murder case: Told CBI a senior student could be involved, says Pradyuman's family". The Indian Express. 10 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  11. ↑ "Ryan school murder: CBI probe throws spotlight on Gurgaon police botch-up". Hindustan Times. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  12. ↑ "Never believed conductor was guilty, want juvenile to be tried as adult: Pradyuman kin". The Indian Express. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  13. ↑ Kumar, Ajay (11 September 2017). "Gurgaon murder: Ryan's top officials forced me to admit knife was part of bus tool kit, says driver". India Today. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  14. ↑ "Ryan school murder: Pradyuman Thakur was not sexually assaulted, says doctor". The Indian Express. 12 September 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  15. ↑ "Ryan School murder case: Tied me up, gave electric shocks, says bus conductor". The Indian Express. 25 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  16. 1 2 "Ryan School murder case: Facing botched-up probe charge, Gurugram top cop says made honest attempt to bring justice". The Indian Express. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  17. 1 2 3 "Ryan student murder: Forensics team reaches school for clues, CBI initiates probe; top developments". The Indian Express. 23 September 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  18. 1 2 3 4 "Pradyuman Thakur murder case: Juvenile accused sent to observational home until November 22". The Indian Express. 11 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  19. 1 2 3 4 5 "Ryan school murder case: CBI says juvenile got knife to school, weapon found in toilet days after murder". The Indian Express. 10 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  20. ↑ "Ryan School murder case: Accused teenager sent to juvenile home for 14 days". The Indian Express. 22 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  21. ↑ "Ryan murder Accused showed no suspicious behavior after the incident, says bus driver". The Indian Express. 21 November 2017.
  22. ↑ "Ryan International School murder case: Bus conductor Ashok Kumar acquitted, here are top developments so far". Financial Express. 28 February 2018. Retrieved 4 March 2018.
  23. ↑ "Pradyuman murder case: Will the bar now boycott the student, asks father of conductor". The Indian Express. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  24. ↑ "No accused should be denied a lawyer, says SC on Ryan School murder case". The Hindu. 18 September 2017. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  25. 1 2 "Ryan school murder case: 16-yr-old wasn't a suspect, could not find any motive, says Gurgaon Police". The Indian Express. 10 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  26. ↑ "One murder, three families, and a long wait for justice". Hindustan Times. 8 September 2019. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  27. ↑ "Ryan school murder case: Conductor's family may press charges against Gurgaon police". The Indian Express. 11 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  28. ↑ "Student murder: 4 Gurgaon cops charged with framing conductor". The Indian Express. 9 January 2021. Retrieved 29 November 2021.
  29. 1 2 Sinha, Bhadra (8 February 2021). "After 3 years and multiple delays, trial yet to begin in Gurugram school murder case". ThePrint. Retrieved 29 November 2021.
  30. 1 2 PTI (11 September 2017). "Ryan International School murder: SC notice to govt, CBSE on plea by father of murdered student". Livemint. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  31. ↑ "Crime and callousness". The Indian Express. 20 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  32. ↑ "Ryan school murder: CBI says Class 11 student 'killed' Pradyuman because he wanted exams postponed". Hindustan Times. 8 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  33. ↑ "Ryan murder: Decision on bus conductor's bail today". Hindustan Times. 20 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  34. 1 2 "Twist in Ryan school murder case: CBI apprehends class XI student for allegedly killing Pradyuman". The Indian Express. 8 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  35. 1 2 3 "Ryan International School murder case: Haryana's case unravels, CBI detains class XI student, clears conductor". The Indian Express. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  36. ↑ "CBI's next step in Ryan school murder case: Take student to crime spot, knife shop, recreate what happened". The Indian Express. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  37. ↑ "Ryan murder: CBI scans phone, computer of accused". The Indian Express. 15 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  38. ↑ "CBI says 16-year-old Ryan student admits to killing Pradyumn". Hindustan Times. 9 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  39. 1 2 3 "Ryan school murder case: Juvenile accused of Pradyuman's killing to be tried as an adult". The Indian Express. 21 December 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  40. ↑ "MHRD plans to train over 42 lakh school teachers to address mental health issues". Hindustan Times. 22 June 2019. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  41. ↑ David, Rohit E. (15 November 2017). "Pradyuman case: Ryan suspect 'confessed' due to CBI torture: Dad". The Times of India. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  42. ↑ "Ryan school murder: Accused teen recreates crime scene for police, father alleges CBI torturing son". Hindustan Times. 11 November 2017. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  43. 1 2 3 4 5 "Gurgaon Ryan International School murder LIVE UPDATES: I appeal all parents to refrain from any violence, says Pradyuman's father". The Indian Express. 11 September 2017. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  44. ↑ "Ryan International murder case: Bombay HC rejects anticipatory bail pleas of founders Augustine, Grace and Ryan Pinto". The Indian Express. 14 September 2017. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  45. ↑ "Punjab and Haryana HC rejects Ryan trustees' bail plea". The Hindu. 20 September 2017. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  46. ↑ Correspondent, Legal (11 December 2017). "Supreme Court dismisses plea against bail granted to 3 trustees of Ryan school group". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  47. ↑ PTI (5 October 2017). "Pradyuman murder case: Ryan's negligence led to killing of Pradhyumn: CBSE to SC". The Times of India. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  48. 1 2 3 "Ryan case accused to be tried as adult: Juvenile board". Business Standard India. Press Trust of India. 20 December 2017. Retrieved 7 December 2019.
  49. ↑ "CBI opposes bail plea of Ryan school murder case accused". Press Trust of India. 22 December 2017. Retrieved 7 December 2019.
  50. ↑ "Gurugram Student, Who Allegedly Slit Junior's Throat Over Exam, Gets Bail" . Retrieved 25 October 2022.
  51. ↑ "Protests, Lathicharge Outside Gurgaon School Where 7-Year-Old Was Killed". NDTV. 10 September 2017.
  52. ↑ "7-Year-Old Killed In Gurgaon School By Bus Conductor Who Attempted Sex Assault: Police". NDTV. 8 September 2017.
  53. ↑ "Ryan International School Gurgaon protests: Angry parents protest, Haryana CM Manohar Lal Khattar assures strictest action". The Financial Express. 9 September 2017.
  54. ↑ "1.2 million schools' teachers to be trained about mental health issues". Hindustan Times. 29 June 2019. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  55. ↑ "Talvar 2: Vishal Bhardwaj To Make Film On Ryan International Student's Murder; Parents Unaware". News18. 26 April 2018. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  56. ↑ Sekar, B. R. (5 August 2018). The Mysterious Killer of Class 2 Student. Amazon Digital Services LLC - KDP Print US. ISBN   978-81-936917-2-4.
  57. ↑ Little Murder, A Big (29 December 2021). "A Big Little Murder- Netflix Series". IMDB.
  58. ↑ "Netflix Can't Stream Show On Boy Found Dead In Gurgaon School: Delhi Court". NDTV.com. Retrieved 29 December 2021.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.