Varnika Kundu stalking case: Vikas Barala’s bail plea rejected fourth time
Vikas Barala, son of Haryana BJP chief, got no relief from court yet again as the Chandigarh district court on Monday dismissed his bail application for the fourth time.punjab Updated: Nov 14, 2017 14:49 IST
Vikas Barala, son of Haryana BJP chief, got no relief from court yet again as the Chandigarh district court on Monday dismissed his bail application for the fourth time. Barala (23), is the main accused in the stalking case of disc jockey Varnika Kundu, the daughter of IAS officer VS Kundu. The court of additional district and sessions judge Rajnish K Sharma dismissed the bail petition after looking into the gravity and seriousness of the offences involved.
On September 21, 42 days after the alleged stalking incident, the accused was chargesheeted for kidnap bid, stalking and wrongful restraint.
Various lawyers were seen discussing as to what made Barala not file the bail plea in the high court, given that it had already had been rejected so many times in the trial court.
Prosecution misled the court: Defence
The defence counsel Rabinder Pandit in the bail application said the chargesheet has been filed in the matter and the investigation was also completed, so Barala’s custody is not required and hence, he should be granted bail.
The plea also claims that the case had a fabricated first-information report (FIR) and that the statements given by Varnika Kundu and her father, VS Kundu, had contradictions. It was also mentioned that there were 37 witnesses in the case and the trial was yet to start, if not granted bail this would amount to punishment for him. It was also mentioned that it is assured that Varnika’s car was chased by the accused but it does not mean that the occupants of the car were intending to cause any harm to her as suspected by Varnika. It was also stated that the police had not attached certain documents with chargesheet and had failed to investigate the case properly.
Conduct no ground for bail: Prosecution
Prosecution counsel Manu Kakkar said mere filing of chargesheet against the accused was no ground to grant bail and it does not change the circumstances. Also, a number of Supreme Court judgments were given supporting these arguments. It was also argued that the act and conduct of the petitioner does not entitle him to bail. The reply also mentioned that the mental agony to the victim demands the case to be dealt with a heavy hand.