'No Overhwhelming Circumstance': Gurugram Court Denies Bail To Breastfeeding Mother Of A 28 Day Old Infant Alleged To Have Been Born Premature

A Gurugram Court on Wednesday denied bail to a breastfeeding mother of a 28 day old infant on the ground that the allegations against her are grave and serious in nature. It was contended that the grant of bail to the accused is of crucial importance since she had given birth to a prematurely born infant who was in need of critical medical care. 

The Judicial Magistrate First Class observed that no documents had been submitted in support of the contention that the mother or a baby has any medical issues. It was further opined that in case of any medical urgency, the Medical Officer in the jail is available for treatment and that arrangement can be made for vaccination of infants in the jail premises. 

"Documents attached with the application shows that baby was born after more than 37 weeks of pregnancy which cannot be termed as premature baby. Furthermore, in case of any medical urgency, the Medical Officer in the jail is available for treatment. Hence, this condition of the applicant/accused is not a ground to grant bail to accused. Moreover, as far as vaccination of infants are concerned, this can also be arranged in jail", the Court observed. 

In the instant case, the accused was working as a Branch Manager in a Bank where allegedly a fake account on behalf of the Government had been opened. The main accused in the case one Praveen Yadav had opened a Government Bank Account in Axis Bank where the accused was a Bank Manager. 

Rejecting the grant of regular bail, the Court further held, 

"No overwhelming circumstance has been pointed out which warrants the grant of bail to the accused...The allegations against the accused are grave and serious in nature. Furthermore, the accused is an educated lady and was working as a Branch Manager in a Bank where the fake account of Government was opened and she was also Director and Authorized Signatory in the company M/s Koshia Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, the possibility of her involvement in the crime along-with the main accused Praveen Yadav cannot be ruled out. Therefore, this court is not inclined to grant bail. Hence, the bail application in hand stand disposed, being dismissed."

The Court further directed the concerned jail authorities to provide adequate food to the accused since she is a breastfeeding mother. The jail authorities were also ordered to make arrangements for proper vaccination for the infant as per the provisions of Jail manual.

Arguments

During the proceedings, the counsel for the accused contended that the accused has been falsely implicated in the instant criminal case and had been maliciously arraigned as an accused in the various FIRs by the complainant. It was further submitted that the accused is a new mother who had just delivered a baby who was prematurely born due to a critical medical condition and is in need of critical care. 

The Court was further apprised that the accused is evidently responsible for the daily up-keep, care and feeding of the premature infant and as such keeping her in custody shall not serve the interest of justice. The denial of bail often operates as defacto detention of their infants, it was submitted further. Accordingly, it was contended that the grant of bail was of crucial importance and that no role of the accused has been attributed. 

On the other hand, the State counsel and the counsel appearing for the complainant argued that the charges against the accused are serious in nature and that she has an active role in the commission of the crime. It was further argued that she is an educated lady and a branch manager in the branch where the fake accounts in the name of the government were allegedly opened.

It was further contended that the accused is the Director of a Company M/s Koshia Enterprises Pvt. Ltd which was created for the commission of the alleged crime. The Court was further informed that the accused is the family member of main accused Praveen Yadav and had shared the amount earned in the commission of the crime.

Advocates Nipun Saxena and Ajay Yadav appeared for the accused. 

Case Title: Rituraj Yadav v. State of Haryana 

Click Here To Read/Download Order