Sonia Released on Bail
Asserting that it is a well settled proposition of law that “bail” is the rule and “jail” an exception, the South Goa Sessions Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to Nadia Torrado’s mother Sonia, who was arrested by the Crime branch on July 15
Additional Sessions Judge B P Deshpande ordered that the accused to be released on bail of Rs 20,000 with one surety of an identical amount. The accused was directed to attend the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate with the Investigation Officer.
The court further directed the accused not to tamper with the prosecution witness and shall not leave the state without prior permission of the court.
Saying that the accused is a teacher by procession, Judge Deshpande observed that the accused had made herself available for investigations from the day she returned back from Chennai and attended the police stations whenever called and cooperated with the investigating machinery.
Referring to the Crime branch plea that the accused will tamper with evidence or indulge in further destruction of evidence, the Judge said a period of two months have already passed from the date of the incident, adding that the prosecution did not disclose as to what further material or evidence could be tampered with. Similarly, the Judge said the prosecution did not disclose as to what further destruction is possible and kept pending since already a period of two months have passed.
On the plea that Sonia is required in police custody to obtain call details for the period from May 13-15, Judge Deshpande said such call details could be collected from the service provider and not from the accused.
The Judge literally questioned the Crime branch why Sonia was not arrested by the investigating agency in the last one month if they wanted to recover the alleged items, laptop, mobile sets and even the ratol past tube. On the whereabouts of the maid servant, Judge said this was within the knowledge of the investigating officer, but the agency did not arrest the accused though she was called on many occasions.
Sonia’a legal counsel Adv Radharao Gracias in his arguments had drawn attention of the court that Pacheco’s OSD Lydon Monteiro, who was charged for destruction of evidence, has been granted anticipatory bail by the supreme court. In this respect, Judge Deshpande said that one accused against whom there were charges of destroying of evidence, similar of that faced by Sonia, has already been released on bail by the Supreme court and only the main accused is in custody at present. “The accused is a lady and therefore she is covered under the proviso of Section 437 (ii) of Cr P C. Further, the accused was available from day one when the case was taken up by CID, Crime branch, and she was called and interrogated on many occasions. She has cooperated on all occasions and her statements have been recorded from time to time. Thus, it is clear that she has cooperated with the prosecution with regard to the present matter,” Judge Deshpande added.
On the aspect of recovery of some articles, Judge Deshpande said “admittedly, the accused is a teacher by profession and she has attended the police station as and when called. The aspect of recovery, if any, could be carried out without keeping her in custody,” the Judge said. The Judge further said the accused is arrested only for destruction of evidence, adding that there is nothing alleged in the Crime branch reply that the accused is also involved with regard to the offense of culpable homicide, which is in fact leveled against the main accused.
Additional Sessions Judge B P Deshpande ordered that the accused to be released on bail of Rs 20,000 with one surety of an identical amount. The accused was directed to attend the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate with the Investigation Officer.
The court further directed the accused not to tamper with the prosecution witness and shall not leave the state without prior permission of the court.
Saying that the accused is a teacher by procession, Judge Deshpande observed that the accused had made herself available for investigations from the day she returned back from Chennai and attended the police stations whenever called and cooperated with the investigating machinery.
Referring to the Crime branch plea that the accused will tamper with evidence or indulge in further destruction of evidence, the Judge said a period of two months have already passed from the date of the incident, adding that the prosecution did not disclose as to what further material or evidence could be tampered with. Similarly, the Judge said the prosecution did not disclose as to what further destruction is possible and kept pending since already a period of two months have passed.
On the plea that Sonia is required in police custody to obtain call details for the period from May 13-15, Judge Deshpande said such call details could be collected from the service provider and not from the accused.
The Judge literally questioned the Crime branch why Sonia was not arrested by the investigating agency in the last one month if they wanted to recover the alleged items, laptop, mobile sets and even the ratol past tube. On the whereabouts of the maid servant, Judge said this was within the knowledge of the investigating officer, but the agency did not arrest the accused though she was called on many occasions.
Sonia’a legal counsel Adv Radharao Gracias in his arguments had drawn attention of the court that Pacheco’s OSD Lydon Monteiro, who was charged for destruction of evidence, has been granted anticipatory bail by the supreme court. In this respect, Judge Deshpande said that one accused against whom there were charges of destroying of evidence, similar of that faced by Sonia, has already been released on bail by the Supreme court and only the main accused is in custody at present. “The accused is a lady and therefore she is covered under the proviso of Section 437 (ii) of Cr P C. Further, the accused was available from day one when the case was taken up by CID, Crime branch, and she was called and interrogated on many occasions. She has cooperated on all occasions and her statements have been recorded from time to time. Thus, it is clear that she has cooperated with the prosecution with regard to the present matter,” Judge Deshpande added.
On the aspect of recovery of some articles, Judge Deshpande said “admittedly, the accused is a teacher by profession and she has attended the police station as and when called. The aspect of recovery, if any, could be carried out without keeping her in custody,” the Judge said. The Judge further said the accused is arrested only for destruction of evidence, adding that there is nothing alleged in the Crime branch reply that the accused is also involved with regard to the offense of culpable homicide, which is in fact leveled against the main accused.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.