Chandigarh stalking: Court rejects Vikas Barala’s bail, says he behaved like a ‘roadside Romeo’
Vikas and his friend were booked on charges of stalking and attempting to abduct Chandigarh-based disc jockey Varnika Kundu.punjab Updated: Sep 13, 2017 00:01 IST
Stating that, “The petitioner (Vikas Barala) behaved like a roadside Romeo and that it was not a fit case where benefit of bail be given to the petitioner,” the court of additional district and sessions judge Rajnish Kumar Sharma denied bail to Vikas Barala, the main accused in the stalking case of Chandigarh-based disc jockey Varnika Kundu, on Tuesday. Barala is the son of Haryana BJP chief Subhash Barala. Previously, a lower court had denied the bail to both Vikas and his friend Ashish Verma, the co-accused in the case.
Varnika, the daughter of a senior IAS officer, had accused Vikas (23) and his friend Kumar (27) of stalking her last month.
The judgment mentions that was no ‘straitjacketed formula’ for consideration of grant of bail to the accused and that his culpable intention was the crux of the matter.
The judge also observed the mere fact that accused was in jail for long was no ground for grant of bail to him, adding that there was nothing on record to prove that there was animosity between accused and complainant.
Making a reference to the rise in crimes against women, the court also observed that “...more and more girl students, women etc go to educational institutions, work places etc and their protection is of extreme importance to a civilised and cultured society.”
It went on to add, “The experience of a woman in crowded buses, metro trains etc are horrendous and painful ordeal.”
Barala raised concern over police investigation
Barala applied for bail while raising concern over the police investigation and also sought CCTV footage of the police station when the complaint was made. It was alleged that the complainant and her father framed the complaint under the guidance of two advocates who were present at that hour. It was also alleged that it was a media trial and the kidnapping sections were added under pressure.
The defence counsel Surya Prakash further deposed that if the accused had to make use of his ‘influential family’, he would have done it by now given that he had been in custody for 40 days. The prosecution represented by Manu Kakkar contested the claim, citing a Supreme Court judgment according to which the means of a person are also considered in such cases. Varnika’s lawyer Pankaj Bhardwaj, on the other hand, contended that it wasn’t an IAS officer who accompanied Varnika to the police station, rather it was a father, who acted responsibly in such a situation.