India Culture, Business, Sports and Food. Get all the buzz in India now

Court A Delhi court convicted Sanjeev Nanda, the son of an arms dealer and grandson of former Naval Chief S M Nanda in the sensational BMW hit-and-run case on Tuesday. He was accused of mowing down six persons including three policemen in January 1999. Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Kumar said, “Sanjeev Nanda, I hold you guilty under Section 304 (Part II) (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the IPC.” Court has also convicted three other persons who were with him inside the car when the incident had happened. They are businessman Rajeev Gupta and his two employees Bhola Nath and Shyam Singh. They are held guilty of destructing the evidence as they were found washing blood stains and victims’ flesh pieces from the car when all were arrested by the police. But court acquitted his friend Manik Kapoor who was also inside the vehicle when the incident had happened. Announcement of the quantum of punishment will be made on Wednesday.

Section 304 He and the others were held guilty under the Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC, which is applied in those cases in which an accused knowingly but unintentionally commits a crime that it can cause death. The accused can be punished with maximum 10 years of punishment or fine or both.

Twists And Turns This case had gone through many ups and downs as some eye-witnesses had turned hostile. Sunil Kulkarni, one of the eye-witness and sole survivor of the incident had turned hostile during the prosecution. He had even said that it was not a car but a truck that had run over the people. But in another statement in the court he had recognized Sanjeev Nanda as one of the car occupants. This case had hit the head lines once again as a news channel’s sting operation had exposed the nexus between Nanda’s counsel, R K Anand, and prosecutor I U Khan that had subverted the free and fare administration of Justice. Later on Delhi High Court had held senior advocate R K Anand and colleague I U Khan guilty of interfering in the free flow of justice and and barred them from entering into the courts for four months.

This case has exposed that how the rich can temper with the evidence and can interfere in the free flow of justice. On the other hand it has also exposed the nexus between Nanda’s counsel, R K Anand, and prosecutor I U Khan which is just a tip of the iceberg. A killer of six persons has been held guilty only under Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC. To what extent people accept the judgment it depends on them but one thing is evident that justice has prevailed.