Raising serious question about the identity of one of the prosecution witnesses (PWs) in the 28-year-old call centre employee Jigisha Ghosh murder trial, lawyer of two accused persons contended in a Delhi court as to how the PW could be trusted as he had allegedly failed in furnishing his identity to the court.
While cross-examining Viva Ram, one of the PWs in the case, Amit Kumar, lawyer of the two accused — Amit Shukla and Baljeet Mallik — disputed his identity as a security guard when he failed to furnish the same in the Saket court.
Ram deposed before the court of special judge R. Kiran Nath that he had last seen the two accused in the company of Jigisha, an operations manager with Hewitt Associates, in Noida. When asked by Mr Kumar to show at least one identity, Mr Ram showed his tattooed hand (name being written on his hand) to the court.
Mr Ram was posted as a security guard at that ATM in Mahipalpur, where the accused came along with Jigisha to withdraw money on March 20, 2009.
Mr Kumar, however, pointed out that a witness has to show his proper identity and without showing it, how can the court taken him into confidence as a P.
Earlier, recording of statements of Jagannath Ghosh, Jigisha’s father, was completed. The court fixed February 21 the next date of hearing to continue the testimony in the case.
Jigisha had gone missing in the early hours of March 18, 2009 from her Vasant Vihar home half-an-hour after her office cab had dropped her. Three days later, her decomposed body was allegedly found near Bhatkal Lake in Faridabad.