She played a decisive role in the gruesome crime: Allahabad High Court denies bail to wife of Amar Dubey in Bikru encounter case

The Allahabad High Court yesterday rejected the bail plea of the Ms. A, the wife of Amar Dubey, who was killed in the famous Bikru incident in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh in which eight policemen were shot dead by gangster Vikas Dubey and his associates..The Court prima facie noted the applicant/accused, who was 17 years old when the incident took place, played a decisive role in the gruesome crime. The order stated,"This Court is of considered opinion that the short-lived association of the revisionist’s with Amar Dubey, a close associate of Vikas Dubey’s, followed by her participation in the gruesome crime, and her subsequent conduct in the observation home, firmly place her case in the category where, if released on bail, she would come into association with known criminals. That, in turn, would cause moral, physical and psychological danger to her.".Justice JJ Munir further said that permitting the revisionist to walk out free on bail would shake the law abiding citizens’ faith in the rule of law."In the circumstances, permitting the revisionist to walk out free on bail would shake the law abiding citizens’ faith in the rule of law and the State’s authority. If that were to be done, it would certainly defeat the ends of justice. This Court, therefore, finds the revisionist dis-entitled to bail under all the three exceptions to the rule, envisaged under the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Act of 2015.".The Court was hearing a criminal revision petition preferred by Ms. A, who submitted that she was a minor when the incident took place. The Juvenile Board had determined the age of the applicant/revisionist to be 16 years, 10 months and 12 days old on the date of occurrence. The revisionist then made an application for bail to the Board, which was rejected. She then preferred a second application for bail to the Board, which was again rejected on dated October 13, 2020..Aggrieved by the orders, she filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat, under Section 101 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. The appeal came up for determination before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge on November 24, 2020 and the same was dismissed. .The revisionist, Ms. A was charged under a whole host of provisions under the Indian Penal Code, including murder under Section 302. .After analyzing the chain of events and the involvement of the applicant, the Court noted that the same was not of an ordinary kind, as it involved the elimination of eight policemen and injuries to six others.The Court described it as a horrendous crime that shocks the conscience of the society and strikes at the roots of the State’s authority in its territory..Counsel for the revisionist, Advocate Prabha Shanker Mishra, submitted that she has been implicated in this crime, because she had the misfortune of marrying Amar Dubey (who died in the encounter) a few days before the occurrence. It was further submitted that she was a minor and a young girl, a month and some days shy of 17 years and she was neither an associate of the principal accused, Vikas Dubey, or a member of his gang. .On the other hand, Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal submitted that Khushi was no silent spectator to the gruesome crime committed by Vikas Dubey and his gang.In regard to her age, it was submitted that she is above 16 years of age, and the offence involved is heinous in nature. Even the Board had opined, on a preliminary assessment, that the revisionist had the requisite mental and physical capacity to commit the offence, as also the ability to understand the consequences, he submitted..The Court took note of the statement given by Inspector Vishwanath Mishra under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), that when the incident took place, there were women atop the house who were saying that no police personnel should go back alive, and were instigating the men to do kill them..Accordingly, the Court opined that she is credited with the role of exhorting men in Vikas Dubey’s gang to eliminate every one of the policemen.."It is quite possible that the marriage was short-lived, but the association was long, on account of which, a newly-wed bride was seen moving around with men wielding guns, directing their fire to hidden policemen, and exhorting them to shoot each policemen to death," the Court remarked..Accordingly, the criminal revision petition was dismissed and the Court said that Ms. A is dis-entitled to bail under all the three exceptions to the rule envisaged under the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. .[Read order]