Delhi Court Rejects Third Bail Plea Of Woman Accused In Acid Attack Case
New Delhi: The court of additional sessions judge Dhirendra Rana dismissed the third bail application of a woman accused in an
acid attack case
, observing that no fresh grounds were pleaded on behalf of the accused in the present application. The case centres on allegations that the woman, Ruby, and her co-accused attacked a woman at her matrimonial home in 2018.
According to the prosecution, on June 17, 2018, the survivor alleged that her sister-in-law Ruby and mother-in-law Guddi, along with her brother-in-law Neeraj, pulled her hair, and her husband Jitender forcefully put acid into her mouth.
You Can Also Check:
Delhi AQI
|
Weather in Delhi
|
Bank Holidays in Delhi
|
Public Holidays in Delhi
Advocate Aditi Drall, appearing on behalf of the survivor, argued that the nature of the allegations was serious. She further added that the accused filed for bail before the high court, where arguments were heard at length before Delhi High Court, and thereafter, the application was withdrawn. Since then, there has been no change in circumstances, and it is further submitted that the examination of the victim is yet to be completed.
The counsel appearing for Ruby, who is HIV positive, submitted before the court that she was falsely implicated in this case due to wear and tear in the matrimonial dispute arising between the injured and her in-laws. She has been in judicial custody since Feb 19, 2024. The counsel also said that the grounds of arrest were not served upon the accused by the IO, and co-accused person Somwati, who was arrested after being declared a proclaimed offender, has been granted bail.
The judge rejected these contentions point by point.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
a day ago
- India Gazette
Delhi HC grants interim bail to woman suffering from cancer
New Delhi [India], June 7 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has granted interim bail to a woman whose condition is serious due to cancer. She is an accused in a drug case registered by the Delhi Police Crime Branch under the NDPS Act. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela granted petitioner Jyoti interim bail until June 15. The High Court will hear the application on June 13. While issuing notice to the state, the bench has asked the Investigation Officer to verify the medical documents and a status report be filed within 3 days. Keeping in view the extreme and terminal medical condition of the applicant and in view of the humanitarian medical crisis which has arisen, the court allowed the application seeking interim bail. 'The applicant is enlarged on interim bail on medical grounds till.15.06.2025, subject to the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs . 1,00,000 with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent/Trial Court,' Justice Gedela ordered on June 4. Petitioner is an accused in an NDPS Act and was granted interim bail on May 19, 2025 till June 5 on the medical grounds in view of her condition. However the trial court refused to extend the interim bail as her regular bail is pending before the High court. Thereafter, an application seeking interim bail was moved before the High Court. Senior advocate Amit Chaddh,a counsel for the applicant, submitted that as per the Diagnosis Report dated 02.06.2025 of the hospital, the applicant Jyoti, aged 39 years, is suffering from Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia. This is an uncommon and rare kind of cancer. It was further submitted that on an application seeking further extension of the interim bail, on 04.06.2025, the Sessions Judge was not inclined to extend it further and had rejected the interim bail application holding that he had no jurisdiction, since the regular bail plea is pending before this Court. (ANI)
The Hindu
a day ago
- The Hindu
Lawyers to boycott judicial work on June 9 in protest against digital courts shift
Lawyers across Delhi's district courts will abstain from all judicial works including court proceedings on June 9 in protest against the relocation of all digital courts to the Rouse Avenue Court complex. The move comes after Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya on Friday inaugurated 34 digital courts, aimed at reducing paperwork and improving speed as well as efficiency. The courts are dedicated to handling cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, which mostly deals with cheque bounce cases. These digital courts include nine from Dwarka, seven from Tis Hazari, six from Saket, five from Karkardooma Court, four from Rohini and three from Patiala House. In what it described as 'unrest' among the lawyers, the Coordination Committee of all districts court bar associations of Delhi passed a resolution on Friday. 'Coordination Committee has resolved to abstain from judicial work in all Delhi District Courts on Monday, June 9, 2025,' stated the circular. The Aam Aadmi Party government approved the construction of a new district court complex at Rouse Avenue in August 2024 at an estimated cost of ₹427 crore, aimed at streamlining judicial processes and improving accessibility.
The Print
2 days ago
- The Print
Efforts should be made by police to use tech tools for fairness, efficacy: Delhi HC
In the present case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) Act, certain contraband was recovered from a vehicle in transit after a chase without any video recording. The court observed that in absence of independent witnesses and videography, there is an added duty upon the court to scrutinise the evidence more carefully. New Delhi, Jun 7 (PTI) While technology enhances transparency of police investigation and ideally every effort should be made to use such aids, adopting the use of video or audio recording might not be feasible in some cases, the Delhi High Court has said while dismissing the bail plea of an accused in a narcotics case. The petitioner, who was allegedly found to be in possession of 10.860 kg of poppy straw, argued that there was a violation of provisions pertaining to entry, search, seizure and arrest under the NDPS Act. Subsequently, several more sacks of the contraband were allegedly recovered at his instance by the police. His counsel argued that the contraband was recovered in a crowded place but no sincere effort was made to join the public persons or to videograph the search and seizure proceedings conducted at the spot. In the judgement passed on June 5 dismissing the bail plea, Justice Ravinder Dudeja said that although there was admittedly no independent public witness of recovery or any photography/videography, it was at best a 'key irregularity' and there was nothing on record at this stage to suggest that the petitioner was not guilty. 'The use of technology certainly enhances the efficacy and transparency of the police investigation and assures fairness, and therefore, ideally, every effort should be made by the investigating agency to use technological means in aid of investigation. However, there may be situations where audio/video recording may not be feasible like the present case,' said the court. 'The absence of independent witnesses and the videography at best may be regarded as a key irregularity in a search and that would cast an added duty upon the court to scrutinise the evidence regarding the search more carefully,' it added. It noted that in the present case, there was information that contraband was being transported in a vehicle from Alwar, Rajasthan, to Azadpur in Delhi via Punjabi Bagh, and at the time when the petitioner and his co-accused were apprehended, they were shifting the contraband from the car to a motorcycle. The court said the period of the petitioner's custody since August 2023 or that the trial had commenced were by themselves not persuasive grounds for granting relief to the petitioner under the NDPS Act. PTI ADS RT RT This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
