Delhi court to continue hearing final arguments in Puneet extradition case on March 2

New Delhi [India], Feb 11 (ANI): A Delhi court on Tuesday said it will continue hearing on March 2, the final arguments in the extradition case of Puneet, an accused in a hit-and-run incident which took place in Australia in 2008.
As the hearing remained inconclusive, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Navjeet Budhiraja said that the remaining hearing will be continued on the next date.
Puneet, who was on bail, appeared before the court with his defence counsel Kanhaiya Singhal. The Centre has sought the extradition of Puneet to face trial in Australia.
Puneet, a youth, is accused of killing a man in Australia in 2008. He was charged by Victoria Police for causing the death of 19-year-old Dean Hofstee and seriously injuring 20-year-old Clancy Coker in a road accident that happened in 2008. Both victims were students from Queensland.
Police then said alcohol levels in Puneet's blood showed he was inebriated and estimated that he was driving at a speed of 92 miles per hour at the time of the accident.
After being arrested in India, following a widespread manhunt by the Victorian and Indian police, Interpol plans to push for his extradition to Australia in the Delhi court, according to a police statement.
Puneet was arrested on November 29, 2013, after a five-year-long search and later granted bail.
He had gone to Australia to study hospitality and fled the country in 2009 using a friend's passport after he was found guilty of negligent driving, local media had reported.
The Centre had opposed the plea of Puneet seeking to be tried in India, saying that it is an abuse of the process of law and an attempt to further delay the extradition proceedings which has already been delayed.
Puneet earlier told the court that "because of the racist attitude of Australians towards Indian citizens, as evident from the fact that they are taking a keen interest in extradition of the accused, an award of AUD 100,000 was announced."
The Centre had told the court that opinions expressed on social networking websites cannot be construed to mean the opinion of the general public at large or for that matter the Government of Australia which is pursuing the matter and on whose behalf the extradition request has been sent. (ANI)