Admitting the plea, Justice Nirmal Jeet Kaur deferred the hearing till 1 October. The court had on Monday deferred the hearing till Wednesday. Prosecution counsel AAG Anand Purohit told the court that the FIR and the statements of the girl under sections 161 (examination of witnesses by police) and 164 (recording of confessions and statements) of CrPC are identical, to prove that there was nothing like fabrication in the FIR.
When defence counsel Ram Jethmalani sought both the statements, the court said the statement under section 161 could not be provided as the investigation was still pending but the statement under 164 could be obtained by applying to the court. The prosecution continued with the spot verification and identification by the girl, establishing the scene of crime and the conspiracy.
Referring to the defence terming the girl to be suffering from chronic mental illness, the prosecution argued that she has been a meritorious student.