Varnika Kundu with her parents at District Courts in Sector 43, Chandigarh, on Monday. Jagpreet Sandhu Varnika Kundu with her parents at District Courts in Sector 43, Chandigarh, on Monday. Jagpreet Sandhu

During the cross-examination of Varnika Kundu on Monday, Vikas Barala’s counsel claimed that according to mobile tower location records, the former was at Chamkaur Sahib tehsil in Ropar district about an hour before the incident occurred in Chandigarh on the night of the incident when she was allegedly stalked. But Varnika denied that. Her cross-examination will continue on Tuesday.

During cross-examination, Vikas’s counsel Rabindra Pandit questioned Varnika about the night of August 4, the day the incident occurred. Varnika said around 11.30 pm, her driver Sunil drove her from home to Sector 8, where her Chevrolet was parked, and then left. Varnika stated that at 12.15 am on the intervening night of August 4/5, when she entered Sector 7 from the side of a petrol pump on the inner market road of Sector 7, she drove straight and turned left from the sports complex towards KB DAV School.

Then, while driving towards the KB DAV School, she noticed in her rear view mirror that a car was tailing her. As she reached the KB DAV light point, the car pulled over and blocked her car. When she turned right towards Sector 26, the accused car turned with her and tried to block her. It was then that she saw two men in that car. Varnika stated that she then drove towards Sector 26 and then to the light point between sectors 7 and 26, at St John’s School, she turned towards Madhya Marg, but the car kept blocking her way.

Pandit mentioned that going by the mobile tower location records, on the night of August 4, at 11:23:19 pm, Varnika was near Fatehpur village at Chamkaur Sahib tehsil in Ropar district and since 11:23:19, she had been talking with her friend Anubhav Gaurang on the phone. Meanwhile, the call records mentioned that at 12:33:20 am, she dialled 100 (PCR) and the location was Mahatama Gandhi Institute of Public Administration, Institutional Area, Sector 26, Chandigarh.

The defence counsel also asked Varnika about who was with her at Sector 26 Police Station when she went to report the incident and when did she go home. Varnika said that around 1.30 am, she, along with her father V S Kundu, had gone to Sector 26 PS where her father requested advocate Rajdeep Takoria, Varnika’s paternal uncle, to come to the police station.

During the cross-examination, Pandit suggested that on the intervening night of August 4/5, at Sector 26 PS, Varnika’s father V S Kundu had forged Varnika’s signatures on a copy of the FIR, insinuating that Varnika was not present at the police station when the FIR was filed. The defence counsel also sugested that since Varnika was not at the police station on the night of the incident, police could not provide CCTV footage of the police station to the defence.

Pandit even asked Varnika how many times was she interviewed by mediapersons after the incident. Varnika replied that she had been interviewed a number of times, but could not recall the exact number. Varnika also admitted during cross-examination that the media channels also took her along the same route like the incident took place and reconstructed the whole scene at the same time.

Hearing this, Pandit suggested that the police did not pick the CCTV footage from cameras installed by Chandigarh Police. Instead, the footage was procured from private cameras and the accused car was from media channels’ reconstruction of the scene and not the day of the incident. The defence counsel also asked Varnika whether she had informed police or the official concerned about her kidnapping. Varnika replied that she did not inform police about specifically mentioning “kidnapping”, but told police that it was an “attempt”. Prosecution counsel Manu Kakkar, meanwhile, said the call record, in possession of the defence, could be technically faulty as it did not show the exact locations.

Vikas Barala and Ashish Kumar are in judicial custody on charges of stalking, wrongful restraint and abduction attempt on Varnika Kundu. Vikas’s bail plea has been rejected four times.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Chandigarh News, download Indian Express App.