Friday, December 15, 2017
facebook

google plus
FLASH
  • Sensex zooms 358.41 pts to 33,605.11 in opening trade on exit poll results, Nifty gains 110.20 pts at 10,362.30.
Chandigarh

Posted at: Dec 8, 2017, 2:12 AM; last updated: Dec 8, 2017, 2:12 AM (IST)STALKING CASE

Barala to appear for exam under custody

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 7

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today allowed Haryana BJP chief Subhash Barala’s son Vikas Barala to appear for the criminology paper under police custody. Confined to the Burail jail in a stalking case, Barala is pursuing his law degree from Kurukshetra University.

Seeking the grant of regular bail, Barala’s counsel submitted that Barala was already behind bars for almost four months and should be granted bail. Justice Lisa Gill, however, adjourned the hearing of the case to December 20 to await developments before the trial court in the matter, while permitting him to appear for the examination on December 18.

Barala had submitted that he was a law student and was to take the examination in criminology, penology and victimology on December 18. In an attempt to buttress his claim, Barala’s counsel had attached the date sheet with the petition.

Barala is the main accused in the stalking case of disc jockey Varnika Kundu — IAS officer VS Kundu’s daughter. His bail plea was rejected for the fourth time by the trial court only recently, compelling him to move the High Court.

Barala is accused of allegedly stalking Varnika and trying to block her car. He was represented by a battery of lawyers, including Birender Singh Rana, Vinod Ghai, Gagandeep Rana, JS Mehndiratta and Simrandeep S Sandhu. The state was represented by senior advocate RS Rai and Gautam Dutt, while Pankaj Bhardwaj appeared for the complainant.

Seeking the grant of bail, the petitioner claimed that the complainant had, at best, expressed her suspicion that the petitioner and another person Ashish Kumar intended to abduct her. Her suspicion could not form the basis of adding serious offences to the FIR.

There was no material on record to show that the petitioner or Ashish Kumar ever intended or attempted to abduct her. The allegation regarding an attempt to open the door, though not admitted, even if taken to be true, does not attract Section 365 (abduction) read with Section 511 (punishment for an attempt to commit an offence under the penal code).

It was beyond apprehension how a single vehicle could block a wide road in Chandigarh. It was, rather, clear that the petitioner did not stop the complainant and did not obstruct her way. 

The trial was yet to commence. The compliment belonged to an affluent section of society. The other witnesses were mostly police personnel.

COMMENTS

All readers are invited to post comments responsibly. Any messages with foul language or inciting hatred will be deleted. Comments with all capital letters will also be deleted. Readers are encouraged to flag the comments they feel are inappropriate.
The views expressed in the Comments section are of the individuals writing the post. The Tribune does not endorse or support the views in these posts in any manner.
Share On