Shraddha Walkar Murder Case Hearing Deferred as Court Allows Accused to Appear for Master’s Examination
A Delhi court has postponed proceedings in the high-profile Shraddha Walkar murder case after accused Aaftab Amin Poonawala sought exemption from attending the scheduled hearing to appear for his final Master of Arts (Sociology) examination. The examination is being conducted by IGNOU inside Tihar Jail, where Poonawala has been lodged as an undertrial prisoner.
The order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi, who accepted the request after being informed that the examination coincided with the scheduled court proceedings. The hearing listed for July 20 was accordingly cancelled, allowing the accused to complete his academic examination before the trial resumes on the next date fixed by the court.
The decision has reignited public debate over the balance between the legal rights of an accused and the need for speedy justice in one of India’s most gruesome murder cases. While legal experts note that prisoners retain the right to pursue education unless specifically restricted by law, critics argue that repeated adjournments in sensitive criminal trials risk eroding public confidence in the justice delivery system.
The Shraddha Walkar murder case, which shocked the nation in 2022, remains under trial. Prosecutors allege that Poonawala murdered his live-in partner Shraddha Walkar, dismembered her body, and disposed of the remains over several weeks. He has denied the allegations during the trial, and the court continues to examine evidence and witness testimonies.
According to reports, the trial has already witnessed more than 215 hearings over the past three years, with the prosecution still leading evidence. Besides the latest adjournment for examinations, previous delays have also been attributed to medical appointments and procedural requirements, prompting renewed calls for expeditious disposal of the case.
The latest development has also drawn emotional reactions from Shraddha Walkar’s friends and supporters, who questioned whether repeated postponements are prolonging justice for the victim’s family. The controversy has once again highlighted the broader challenge of ensuring both the constitutional rights of an accused and the timely conclusion of criminal trials in cases that have attracted nationwide attention.
