Bhubaneswar, July 1: Due to absence of case record files, Tatwa Prakash Satpathy alias Papu Pom Pom who was in the day arrested from an apartment in Puri with his aide Pradipta Swain alias Gitu, were transferred to judicial custody on late Thursday night.
Court sources say that his bail petition will now be heard on July 4. Both the culprits were been produced at the Khurdha District court and sessions judge late on Thursday night, after which they were sent to the Jharpada Jail. Commissioner of Police, Y.B. Khurania informed the media that a special squad Zone-1 led by ACP had been appointed which arrested the culprits from the Nandighosa Apartment in Puri yesterday morning and they would be produced in court soon. The CP informed that the apartment from which the accused were arrested is owned by Swain.
Papu is being interrogated in connection with the charges levied upon him, but refused to reveal the location on the grounds of security post which he would be brought to court. The Commissionerate is yet to make a formal announcement of his arrest. The announcement of him, getting arrested in the next 48 hours by the ACP came after BJP women’s wing staged a demonstration outside the Mahila police station here demanding the immediate arrest of Pappu. They had given an ultimatum of 48 hours to the police to arrest the accused. In fact, the Police had also pasted a notice outside Papu’s residence on Wednesday night thus ordering him to surrender at the Mahila Police Station on July 7. The notice, served under Section 41(A) of Indian Penal Code (IPC), mentioned the charges against Papu and asked him to cooperate in the investigation.
Notably, Friends Foundation had lodged a complaint at the Mahila Police Station against Papu accusing him of sexually abusing a minor girl after promising her to offer a role. Last week the Khurdha Child Welfare Committee had asked the police officials to register a case against the accused after prime evidences were found on the charges pressed against him when a preliminary investigation had been conducted.
Post this, the Commissionerate filed a case against the actor on charges of 354 (A), 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Sec 8-12 of the POCSO Act.
