Bikru Encounter: Wife Of Gangster Vikas Dubey's Aid Moves Supreme Court Against Refusal Of Bail

The Allahabad High Court on July 17th denied bail to the petitioner in a Criminal Revision filed against a judgment and order of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Kanpur Dehat (dated 24th November, 2020) dismissing her Criminal Appeal against the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board refusing to grant her bail.

The Petitioner in her special leave petition has argued before the top Court that she was admittedly a minor on the date of incident and has been made an accused. She continues that she was arrested solely because her husband was named in the FIR.

Further, she has argued that even though her husband was named in the FIR and was subsequently killed in an alleged encounter by the police force, the petitioner is completely innocent with no criminal antecedents.

"At best, the Petitioner can be termed as a child who was caught at the wrong place at the wrong moment because of the fact of her marriage. Had she not been married to her husband on the day of the incident, she would have been a complete stranger to the events and would have not been made an accused." the petition states.

While urging the Court to grant her bail, the petitioner has submitted that she was neither an associate of the principal accused nor was part of the gang. She pleaded that she was only in the wrong place, at the wrong time; she happened to be at the place of incident with her husband when the event unfolded.

The present petition has been filed by Advocates Prabha Shankar Mishra, Pranav Diesh, Rishabh Raj, Aditya Shekhar and Rishi Gautam.

Facts: The petitioner has been booked under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 396, 332, 333, 412, 353, 504, 506, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7 of The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1961 and Section 3/4 of The Explosive Substances Act, 1908.

The petitioner had applied to be declared a juvenile to the Juvenile Justice Board, Kanpur Dehat and she was found to be 16 years, 10 months and 12 days old on the date of occurrence. After she was declared a juvenile by the Board, she had made an application for bail to the Board, which was rejected. She had then preferred a second application for bail to the Board, which was rejected again. She then moved to special court and thereafter to High Court, in revision.

The High Court while rejecting the bail plea had observed that,

"Prima facie, if not at the centre stage of this diabolical act, certainly as an important player, the revisionists seem to have actively participated. In the circumstances, permitting the revisionist to walk out free on bail would shake the law-abiding citizens' faith in the rule of law and the State's authority. If that were to be done, it would certainly defeat the ends of justice."

As per the prosecution's case, the Police officials, in strong numbers, had gone to arrest Vikas Dubey, a dreaded gangster. However, somehow, Vikas got the information that policemen were coming to arrest him and thus, he laid in wait, along with his henchmen, for the Police to arrive.

Vikas' associates, that included his relatives, had positioned themselves at strategic points, atop the roof of his house and those abutting it. As soon as policemen reached there, they opened indiscriminate fire on them, which led to eight police personnel being shot dead and another six sustaining grievous gunshot injuries.

It is the prosecution case, that while the menfolk pumped bullets into the police personnel, the wives including the petitioner of all the accused were aiding and instigating their husbands.