STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court rejected the bail of Nano Devi who killed her husband Sohan Lal.
The case set up by the prosecution is that on 16.06.2021 Police Station Bani received an information/written complaint from one Sanjay Kumar S/O Gian Chand R/O Bani with regard to the missing of his brother Sohan Lal since 01.06.2021 and that he had specific information from one Radha Krishna with one Kewal Kumar (one of the accused) killed his brother. During the course of investigation, police arrested the said Kewal Kumar and upon his confession before police arrested other accused namely, Ramesh Chander, Nano Devi (applicant) and Kamlesh Singh alleged to have hatched a conspiracy for killing deceased Sohan Lal, husband of the applicant. It was further alleged in the prosecution story that applicant Nano Devi was having illicit relationship with accused Ramesh Chander, which came to the notice of the deceased Sohan Lal. As such, applicant Nano Devi and accused Ramesh Chander planned the murder of deceased Sohan Lal in connivance with other accused Kamlesh Singh and Kewal Kumar. It is the case of the prosecution that applicant Nano Devi and Ramesh Chander, due to their illicit relationship, executed their plan by providing poison to accused Kamlesh Singh and Kewal Kumar, who administered the same to the deceased by mixing in alcohol and when deceased became unconscious, they tied his body and threw into a gorge.
Justice MA Chowdhary after hearing Adv Tarun Sharma for the applicant whereas Deputy AG Dewakar Sharma for the UT, observed that It is not a case where the murder would have been committed at the spur of the moment, rather the applicant/accused has been alleged to have planned the execution of murder with three other persons to eliminate her husband, just to keep her relations with her paramour who is also one of the accused. The story as projected by the prosecution is that on having a plan for murder of the deceased, the accused administered him poison through alcohol and then threw him into a gorge to ensure that he is killed. Therefore, it seems to be a cold blooded murder under a well thought plan and the kingpin of this plan is the wife of the deceased i.e. applicant herein. Since the case is based on circumstantial evidence, it will not be safe to admit the application to bail as she may tamper with the prosecution evidence and it would be difficult for the prosecution to get the links of the circumstantial evidence to prove the case against any of the accused, if the prosecution witnesses, are either way get influenced by any means. Since many of the witnesses of the prosecution are witnesses to the circumstances and until they are examined, it will not be safe to admit the applicant to bail. The prosecution witnesses who are shown as circumstantial evidence, in the considered opinion of this court, are required to be examined before the plea of the applicant is considered again by the Trial Court. Having regard to the aforesaid discussion and reasons, this application is found without merit and substance and is liable to be rejected at this stage. The application is, therefore, dismissed.
