E-Paper
Panchkula: Court rejects plea to cancel bail of female accused in extortion case
The complex matter is linked to a previous FIR lodged by the accused in December 2024 at the Kasauli police station (Solan, HP) against Mittal and BJP state president Mohan Lal Badoli under sections of gangrape and criminal intimidation
The additional sessions judge court in Panchkula has dismissed a criminal miscellaneous application filed by Jai Bhagwan Mittal, alias Rocky Mittal of Sector 4, seeking to cancel the regular bail granted to a Delhi-based woman.
The bail was secured in a case registered by Panchkula police in February this year under various sections of the BNS, including extortion, criminal intimidation, and criminal conspiracy. Mittal is the complainant in this case, and the female accused was granted anticipatory bail on March 26.
The complex matter is linked to a previous FIR lodged by the accused in December 2024 at the Kasauli police station (Solan, HP) against Mittal and BJP state president Mohan Lal Badoli under sections of gangrape and criminal intimidation. It was informed to the court that Kasauli police initially submitted a cancellation report after a witness allegedly retracted her support, and the report was accepted on March 12.
Mittal’s plea for bail cancellation was based on the claim that the woman violated bail conditions by threatening a key female witness into giving false evidence in the Kasauli case.
The application cited an alleged incident on April 25 where the accused, along with others, threatened and attempted to kidnap the witness, an allegation leading to a separate FIR registered by Delhi police on July 25.
Opposing the plea, the accused’s counsel argued that the application was moved with a “malafide intention” to harass the accused and obstruct the trial in Kasauli. It was averred that the allegation of criminal intimidation of April 25 are vague and not corroborated by any cogent evidence and highlighted the significant three-month delay between the alleged intimidation (April 25) and the filing of the Delhi complaint (July 25).
Additional sessions judge Bikramjit Aroura, in the November 21 order, ruled against Mittal. The court noted that the intimidation allegations remained untested and are not supported by prima facie material at this stage. The delay in lodging the complaint raised doubts which cannot be ignored in cancellation proceedings.
Crucially, the court found no evidence of misuse within the scope of the Panchkula FIR for which the bail was granted, stating, “No witness in the present FIR... has complained of intimidation.” The court held that the pendency of other proceedings or restoration of a protest petition in a different FIR cannot be treated as a supervening circumstance warranting cancellation of bail, thereby dismissing the application.
