Forensic report on FIR against Yuvraj Singh is inconclusive

Cricketer Yuvraj Singh used certain words in an Instagram live video to refer to his fellow player. Those words were the base for an FIR (First Information Report) against the cricketer under various sections of the IPC (Indian Penal Code).

Forensic Report,FIR,Yuvraj,IPC,Indian Penal Code,Punjab and Haryana High Court,Central Forensic Science Laboratory,CFSL,Chandigarh,Rajat Kalsan,Hansi,Lawyer,Yuzvendra Chahal,SC,ST,Adjourned,India,Sports news, Cricket news, Games news, Players news, Competitions,Tournaments,Sports news, latest Cricket news, Players news, Tournaments- True Scoop

What?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court was informed by the Haryana Police that the report by the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh is ‘inconclusive’.

The analysis was regarding the alleged casteist remarks made by the cricketer during one of his live video chats on Instagram.

Response was being sought in a plea filed in February 2021 seeking quashing of the FIR by Yuvraj Singh.

Background

Rajat Kalsan, a Hansi-based lawyer had complained to the police on June 2, 2020.

He claims that Yuvraj Singh made objectionable remarks about Dalits during an Instagram Live with a fellow cricketer Rohit Sharma. The remarks are alleged to be made when Yuvraj Singh referred to another fellow cricketer Yuzvendra Chahal.

This live session was aired in April 2020 and in June 2020 videos of the cricketer addressing two of his colleagues as “Bhangi” began circulating online.

Also read: The Great Khali to be inducted into WWE Hall of Fame

The police lodged an FIR under sections 153, 153 A, 295, 505 of the IPC and section 3 (1) (U) of SC/ST Act at the Hansi city police station.

It must be noted that Yuvraj Singh apologized publicly for having hurt public sentiments and expressed his regret on his choice of the words.

Reaction from the police

Police claimed that the investigation is in its initial stages and the offence committed by the former cricketer is cognisable in nature and non-bailable.

Further, the quashing of the FIR will cause prejudice to the investigating agency as offense is claimed to be an offence “committed against the state”.

Future events

The case stands adjourned for April 28, 2021.


Trending