MUMBAI: A special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court on Friday directed the police to probe the claim of Phoolsing Naresh Kumar alias Phooli, one of the alleged shooters in the October 18 firing incident at actor Tiger Shroff, of being a minor, questioning why neither he nor his lawyer had disclosed the same during earlier remand proceedings.
He also submitted a photocopy of his Aadhar Card to support his claim. His lawyers sought an age inquiry and his transfer to protective custody under the Juvenile Justice Act pending its outcome. The prosecution sought further custody of Phoolsing and four others — Rehan Ansari, Kunal Sanjay, Babita Ram Jatan Rao and Ankit alias Sarpanch Rajesh Khatak — to establish their roles and trace the financial trail.
Represented by advocates Sidhanth Mor and Divyam Gaur, Phoolsing, arrested in Sonipat on October 19, produced a photocopy of his birth certificate showing his date of birth as November 30, 2008, claiming he was approximately 17 years and 10 months old when the incident occurred. Separately, the court extended the police custody of five of the 12 accused produced before it till November 11 and sent the remaining seven to judicial custody.
Opposing his plea, special public prosecutor Sunil Gonsalves said Phoolsing had earlier been arrested in a motorcycle theft case in Sonipat, and that the prosecution needed to verify whether he had been shown as a major.
Asked why he had not disclosed his age earlier, Phoolsing claimed in open court that the police had asked him not to do so and had not allowed him sufficient opportunities to meet his lawyers.
Special judge Satyanarayan R Navander directed investigating officer Sadanand Rane to verify Phoolsing’s age and submit a report within 15 days, but declined to send him to a juvenile home pending the inquiry.
He was represented by advocate Ajinkya Mirgal during both Mumbai proceedings, but neither he nor Mirgal, the court noted, had disclosed his alleged minority during either hearing. Asked about the case, Phoolsing claimed it was fabricated and that he had been tried and acquitted by a juvenile court.
The court noted that Phoolsing had been produced before three courts after his arrest, first before a transit magistrate in Sonipat, then before the additional chief judicial magistrate at Esplanade and finally before the special MCOCA court after the stringent law was invoked in the case.
