She Is In A Position To Abscond & Influence Witnesses: Delhi HC Denies Bail To Actress Accused In Murder Of Lover’s Wife
|The Delhi High Court has refused to grant bail to an actress namely Angel Gupta who has been accused in the case involving murder of her lover’s wife.
The accused actress filed an Application seeking bail in an FIR registered for the offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
A Single Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad said, “The present case is one of a well planned murder where professionals have been hired to commit the heinous crime. The Petitioner, if convicted, can be sentenced to life or even death. The Petitioner is a professional actress and is in a position to abscond and influence the witnesses.”
The Bench added that, looking at the gravity of the offence, the manner in which the incident took place, and the fact that the accused's father has absconded, after being released on bail, the chances of the accused fleeing from justice are high.
Advocate Joginder Tuli represented the Petitioner/accused while APP Aman Usman represented the Respondent/State.
Facts of the Case -
In 2018, an information was received at the Police Station regarding an incident wherein a lady was shot while she was travelling on her scooty. The enquiry revealed that the injured/victim was shifted to the hospital but the doctor declared her brought dead. Hence, an FIR was registered for the offence of murder under IPC and Arms Act. The investigation revealed that the deceased was a school teacher and thereafter, her brothers told the Police that there was an illicit relationship between the deceased’s husband and the Petitioner/accused. This raised a suspicion that they could be involved in this incident.
The accused had used ‘Sehrawat’ as her surname in the e-mail id which was the surname of the deceased’s husband. Further investigation revealed that the accused was in live-in relationship with the deceased’s husband. The daughter of the deceased produced a diary written by her mother in which she had apprehended untoward incidents against her or her children. Resultantly, the accused, her father, and the deceased’s husband were arrested. Thereafter, other co-accused persons were also arrested. Therefore, the accused approached the High Court, seeking bail.
The High Court in the above context of the case, noted, “It has been stated by the learned APP for the State that from 31.01.2024 to 30.08.2024 there are 16 bail orders with respect to different accused in the case and it cannot be said that the prosecution has been lax in proceeding with the trial. This Court is of the opinion that the Trial Court is proceeding in right earnest in concluding the trial and the fact that the trial has not been completed within the time stipulated by the Apex Court would not automatically result in grant of bail to the Petitioner herein in view of the repeated bail applications filed by the various accused in the case and also keeping in mind the various parameters that are required to be considered while deciding a bail application.”
The Court observed that even though most of the prosecution witnesses have been examined but the Petitioner is accused of a very serious offence and though at the stage of bail, the Court need not conduct a mini trial but the heinousness of the offence is one of the important and relevant factors while considering as to whether bail should be granted or not.
“The Petitioner has repeatedly moved applications for grant of bail and has been granted interim bail to take care of her mother. The operation of Petitioner’s mother has been conducted successfully and even after the condition of the Petitioner’s mother has improved, the Petitioner has repeatedly approached this Court for extension of bail. The father of the Petitioner is absconding and there is all likelihood that the Petitioner would also abscond, if released on bail at the fag-end of the trial, with the help of her father, who has not surrendered and has abused the liberty granted to him”, it remarked.
Furthermore, the Court said that though the trial is coming to a fag-end, bail ought not to be granted to the Petitioner. It also directed the Trial Court to ensure that the trial is completed within five months.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Bail Application.
Cause Title- Angel Gupta v. State NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:8535)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Joginder Tuli, Joshini Tuli, and Shrikant Sharma.
Respondent: APP Aman Usman, Advocates C.M. Sangwan, and Saksham Aggarwal.