Chhatrasal case: Police seeks 12 days custody of Olympic medallist Sushil

Delhi Police sought 12-day custody of two-time Olympic medallist wrestler Sushil Kumar to question him over his alleged involvement in the death of a 23-year-old wrestler at Chhatrasal Stadium

The Delhi Police on Sunday sought a 12-day custody of two-time Olympic medallist wrestler Sushil Kumar to question him over his alleged involvement in the death of a 23-year-old wrestler at Chhatrasal Stadium.

Metropolitan Magistrate Divya Malhotra reserved the order on the police remand application. Kumar was physically produced before the court, following which the police was allowed to interrogate him for 30 minutes.

During the proceedings, Additional Public Prosecutor Atul Shrivastava told the court that Kumar's interrogation is required to know the motive behind the crime and recover the weapon used in the murder and the clothes he was wearing during the incident.

The camera at the stadium was dismantled and he took away the DDR of the place. This has to be recovered, the prosecutor told the court, seeking Kumar's custody.

According to the Delhi Police, Sushil Kumar and his associates allegedly assaulted fellow wrestler Sagar Dhankar and two of his friends Sonu and Amit Kumar at the stadium on May 4 night. Sagar succumbed to the injuries later.

The absconding international wrestler was arrested, along with co-accused Ajay, on Sunday from outer Delhi's Mundka area.

Kumar had been on the run for nearly 20 days and attempted to secure pre-arrest bail by claiming that the probe against him is biased.

Police said that they have electronic evidence where he could be seen hitting the wrestler with a stick.

On May 18, the district court rejected his anticipatory bail application, noting that he was prima facie the main conspirator in the case and that allegations against him were serious.

The Delhi Police filed an FIR in the case under sections 302 (murder), 308 (culpable homicide), 365 (kidnapping), 325 (causing grievous hurt), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 341 (wrongful restraint) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

It was also booked him under sections 188 (Disobedience to order by public servant), 269 (negligent act likely to spread infection of disease), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC and various sections under the Arms Act.