Murder after argument over noisy juveniles

Delhi Police apprehended three juveniles and are looking out for 2 extra for allegedly killing a 20-year-old man in Central Delhi’s Patel Nagar. Police mentioned the assault was revenge for an earlier altercation with the sufferer, recognized as Shubham Kumar, and his employer as they’d objected to a few of the juveniles shouting abuses outdoors their house.

Police mentioned the accused had additionally deliberate to kill his employer, a businessman, however the latter had gone out together with his household on the time of the assault.

The accused have been produced earlier than a juvenile justice board and despatched to a juvenile house.

Police mentioned Kumar, who hailed from Bihar’s Madhepura, was working as a home assist. “His employer’s brother, who stays in the adjoining building, told police that three days ago, four locals were shouting abuses at each other outside their house. Kumar and his employer asked them not to make noise but that led to an argument. The issue was resolved after locals intervened,” a senior police officer mentioned.

On Monday, Kumar was alone in the home as his employer had gone out together with his spouse and kids. “A group of 5-6 boys, including those with whom they had an argument, knocked on the door. Four of them were carrying knives,” a senior police officer mentioned.

The employer’s brother alleged that they stabbed Kumar a number of occasions after he opened the door. “They then managed to escape… The victim was taken to a nearby hospital where he died during treatment. An FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint and several teams were formed to nab the accused,” an officer mentioned.

During investigation, CCTV cameras have been scanned and police gathered native intelligence concerning the accused. “Three of them were apprehended in raids. They said they felt angry after they were scolded in front of so many people. So they decided to take revenge. They shared their plan with their associates and decided to kill both men, but the employer was not present at home,” the officer mentioned.


Back to top button