Court has dismissed the third bail application of Meena Devi, 50, the mother of alleged gangster Arvind alias Gilli Rana, in a ₹5-crore extortion case involving a shooting attack on club owner Rattan Chand Lubana. The victim’s Chandigarh club, De’Orra, had been targeted in a bomb blast on November 26, 2024, following which he allegedly continued to receive extortion threats.
The court of additional sessions judge dismissed the bail plea on Tuesday, observing that the allegations against the accused were serious and material witnesses were yet to be examined.
The firing took place in the intervening night of June 3 and 4 outside Swiss Lounge in Sector 5, Panchkula. According to the FIR, two assailants opened fire on Lubana, hitting him in the back and left arm. Another man, Lalit, sustained a bullet injury to his right shoulder. The attackers allegedly fled on a black Pulsar motorcycle.
Lubana is the younger brother of Narinder Pal Singh Lubana, Bharatiya Janata Party’s Yuva Morcha’s Panchkula district president and a former municipal councillor from Ward 1. His sister-in-law, Paramjeet Kaur, is the current councillor from the ward.
According to the prosecution, a supplementary statement by the injured complainant alleged that Arvind alias Gilli Rana had demanded ₹5 crore and directed Lubana to send the money to Meena Devi. The prosecution further alleged that she remained in contact with her son.
{{/usCountry}}According to the prosecution, a supplementary statement by the injured complainant alleged that Arvind alias Gilli Rana had demanded ₹5 crore and directed Lubana to send the money to Meena Devi. The prosecution further alleged that she remained in contact with her son.
{{/usCountry}}The defence argued that Meena Devi had been falsely implicated because of her relationship with her son. Her counsel submitted that she was neither present at the scene nor accused of directly participating in the shooting, and that no incriminating material had been recovered from her. The defence also pointed out that the challan had been filed.
The complainant’s counsel expressed no objection to bail, citing the accused’s age. However, the court held that the seriousness of the allegations, the role attributed to her and the potential punishment in the event of conviction weighed against granting relief. The court dismissed her application, clarifying that its observations would not affect the merits of the case.