MUMBAI: Observing that the act of dropping a seriously injured victim to her residence instead of providing medical treatment was highly objectionable and that she tried to save her son by claiming the victim attempted suicide, a sessions court on Thursday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of 53-year-old Radhika Darekar, mother of Amey Darekar (25) who was held for allegedly attempting to murder his girlfriend, Priyangi Singh (24), by pushing her off a water tank on the 15th floor of a Dahisar building last month.
"The statement of the applicant (Radhika) that the victim tried to commit suicide is contrary to the real fact. Thus, prima facie it appears that the applicant has tried to mislead that the victim has attempted to commit suicide. Making such a misleading statement prima facie shows that the applicant tried to save her son, ie the co-accused, and thereby, she had abetted the proceeding. It may be that she aided the co-accused from vanishing the evidence," Judge Shrikant Y Bhosale said.
The court said as per investigations, it was shown that Amey had pushed the victim, thereby making her fall off the terrace, due to which she sustained serious injuries. "The co-accused initially brought the victim to his house where from the applicant took the victim to her parents' house. There must be some conversation between the co-accused and the present applicant about the fact how and why the victim sustained injuries," the judge said.
Priyangi, a BPO staffer, was allegedly pushed off the 18-foot-high water tank on the 15th floor terrace of La Belleza building in Dahisar (East) on November 13. Singh underwent a six-hour spinal surgery in which she got 14 screw implants. Police had alleged that a fight broke out between the couple after they had a drink. Amey had first taken Priyangi to his Borivli home and then his mother dropped her to her Malad residence and left her with the domestic help. Opposing her plea, the prosecution submitted that the mother had even told the help that she had attempted suicide.
Rejecting the anticipatory bail plea, the judge further said that while the real fact would be clear only after conclusion of full investigations, the presence of the accused with the investigation officer for the purpose of confrontation is absolutely necessary.
"Considering all these aspects and seriousness of the crime, at this juncture it cannot be said that the applicant is innocent and is entitled for discretionary relief like granting of anticipatory bail. In other words, the court is not convinced that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail," the judge said.