Delhi Court Rejects Second Bail Plea Of Woman Accused Of Stealing Law Intern's Bag From Delhi High Court
A Delhi Court on Monday rejected the second bail application moved by a woman accused of stealing bags and other valuables articles like laptop from the Delhi High Court.Metropolitan Magistrate Kapil Gupta of Patiala House Courts denied bail to Bala Saraswati observing that no ground of bail was made out in her favour. Her first bail application was dismissed by a Duty MM earlier this...
A Delhi Court on Monday rejected the second bail application moved by a woman accused of stealing bags and other valuables articles like laptop from the Delhi High Court.
Metropolitan Magistrate Kapil Gupta of Patiala House Courts denied bail to Bala Saraswati observing that no ground of bail was made out in her favour. Her first bail application was dismissed by a Duty MM earlier this month.
Observing that the allegations against her are grave and serious in nature and that the co-accused has not yet been arrested, the judge said:
“…for the present application, in facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, the investigation appears o be still pending and the charge sheet has not yet been filed. Furthermore, there is a possibility that the the accused may induce or threaten witnesses and cOuld even tamper with the evidence. The accused is also involved in another case.”
The FIR was registered by a law intern alleging that the accused woman stole her bag and other valuable articles including laptop and iPad from outside a courtroom in the Delhi High Court. The incident was captured in a CCTC camera.
It was submitted on behalf of the accused woman that she is nowhere visible in the CCTV footage and that it is not possible for any person to enter the High Court without any pass or identity card. It was further argued that no notice was served on her under Section s41A of CrPC and that she was no more required for custodial interrogation.
On the other hand, the prosecution opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the case property was not recovered and that the co-accused had also not been arrested. It was also submitted that the reply under Section 41A of CrPC was served upon her but she did not cooperate in the investigation.
Denying relief to the woman, the court observed, “In view of the submissions made and the material available on record it can be clearly seen that no change of circumstance has been pointed out on behalf of the accused since the last bail application was dismissed.”
Advocate Prabhav Ralli appeared for the complainant. Advocate Neetu Kumari appeared for the accused.