Anuj Kumar, the accused in the Shiv Nadar University shooting case, reportedly bought a pistol from an acquaintance with the intention of “showing off” to his friends, according to police. He approached the acquaintance to assist him in obtaining the weapon, for which he made a payment of Rs 35,000 through a UPI transaction and in cash, according reports.
Kumar, allegedly shot dead fellow student Sneha Chaurasia, 21 on May 18 near the dining room on the university campus before going to his room in the boys’ hostel and killing himself.
The duo had been in a relationship for over a year but had broken up some time back, a police official said.
According to police, Kumar procured the country-made pistol in Bulandshahr that he had kept with him inside the campus for 29 days and looked for the right time to execute his plan, reported the Times of India.
Police on Saturday arrested three individuals who aided Kumar in acquiring the firearm: Naveen Bhati, an ambulance driver who has known the accused since their school days, Divyansh Awasthi, a resident of Noida and Bhati’s current employer, and Shekhar, based in Lucknow, who originally possessed the gun.
DCP (Greater Noida) Saad Miya Khan stated, investigation was launched to trace the source of the gun following the filing of a case under the Arms Act. The breakthrough came when they discovered two transactions made by Kumar to a digital wallet. It was later revealed that the wallet belonged to Naveen Bhati.
According to SHO Sujeet Upadhyay from Dadri police station, Kumar made two transactions of Rs 12,000 and Rs 13,000 to Bhati’s digital wallet, while the remaining amount was paid in cash.” Bhati obtained the gun and five cartridges on behalf of Kumar. Kumar fired all five shots, three at Chaurasia, one at a wall in a hostel room, and the final one into his own temple.
ACP Sarthak Sengar further said that the arrested trio became aware of the murder-suicide incident through the news. He stated, “Anuj had informed Bhati that he needed the gun to show off, not to harm anyone. The money was divided among them – Awasthi and Shekhar received Rs 15,000 each, and Bhati received Rs 5,000.”
The three individuals were presented in court and subsequently sent to judicial custody.
A complaint was lodged by the father of the female student, alleging a conspiracy behind the death. He expressed, “The accused had been harassing my daughter and pressuring her into immoral and wrongful activities. Despite informing the university administration about the issue and seeking action against the accused, no steps were taken, which ultimately led to the accused killing my daughter.” The father further revealed that the entire incident was captured on CCTV footage.
The father also mentioned, “The killer had previously recorded a video, which has surfaced on social media, where he mentioned the ‘murder’ of my daughter. He also mentioned a university staffer, a student, and one individual from Kanpur in the video.”
He accused the university of not taking timely and effective action in the matter and urged strict action against the guilty persons and the varsity administration.
Student Told Staff About ‘Assault, Scars on Body’
Before her death, the deceased sociology student had emailed the university about the accused assaulting her four times in a span of two months.
According to her communication with the university, cited by the Indian Express, the student said she was assaulted by Anuj “for the fourth time in a span of two months” and she had “scars on her body”. “Once he had held my throat so hard that it choked me to unconscious state,” she was quoted as saying.
Acknowledging the email, the university in a statement said, “The university received an email from the woman student on March 14, 2023, where she mentioned that she was in a relationship with the accused for two years, and now she had decided to part ways. However, the accused was not ready to accept the split. She wanted that the accused should not reach her or her family. She did not want this to be taken forward as a formal complaint.”
According to the university’s statement, they treated the matter with utmost seriousness and took immediate action. They implemented various interventions and provided professional counseling to both students involved. Within two days, on March 16, 2023, the university issued restraining orders against both individuals.
The university emphasized that they strongly encouraged the female student to file a formal complaint on multiple occasions, which would have allowed them to take even stricter measures. However, the student chose not to pursue this course of action, expressing concerns that her family would not understand the situation and might react negatively towards her.
Comments
0 comment