Supreme Court declines to entertain Kanda’s bail plea

New Delhi, March 22 (IANS) The Supreme Court Friday declined to entertain the bail plea of Haryana lawmaker Gopal Goyal Kanda currently in judicial custody for allegedly abetting the suicide by air hostess Geetika Sharma and subsequently by her mother Anuradha Sharma.

The apex court bench of Justice Chandramauli Kumar Prasad and Justice V. Gopala Gowda while declining to entertain the bail plea by Kanda asked senior counsel Mukul Rohtagi to approach the sessions court for the relief.
“You can go to the trial court. You have to follow the procedure as followed by others,” Justice Prasad told Rohtagi.
Unmoved by the persistent plea by Rohtagi to hear the plea, the court said let him (Kanda) to go the court seized of the trial and it would decide the bail plea on its merits.
Rohtagi told the court that the Delhi High Court had already rejected his plea for bail by going in the merits of the case and this would influence the trial court.
At this, the apex court pointed to the high court order which said Kanda was “reluctant” to go to trial court for bail.
The high court denied Kanda bail on Nov 19, 2012, holding that he might influence the witnesses and tamper with the evidence.
The high court was told by the prosecution that before surrendering, Kanda had destroyed the material evidence in the case.
Prior to surrendering before police Aug 8, 2012, Kanda was denied anticipatory bail both by the trial court and the high court.
Kanda, an independent legislator from Sirsa assembly constituency, was arrested on charges of abetting the suicide by Geetika Sharma Aug 5, 2012.
Geetika, in her suicide note, had accused Kanda and his employee Aruna Chadha of allegedly harassing her.
Six months after Geetika’s suicide, her mother Anuradha Sharma too committed suicide in February, for which she too blamed Kanda and his employee Aruna Chadha.
Both Kanda and Chadha have been charged under section 306 (abetment of suicide), 120 B (criminal conspiracy), 506 (criminal intimidation), 201 (destruction of evidence), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery with intention to cheat), 469 (forgery with intention to harm reputation) and 471 (using forged documents as genuine) of the Indian Penal Code and section 66A (hacking of computers) of the Information Technology Act.