Reena Begum vs State of Uttarakhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(UK) 408

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Reena Begum – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Deep Prakash Bhatt, Advocate, V.S. Rathore, Advocate, Lalit Sharma, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Reena Begum is in judicial custody in FIR No. 0265 of 2022, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought her release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the applicant and co-accused trapped the deceased and thereafter, blackmailing. They demanded money from the deceased. He did pay about Rs. 4,50,000/-, but still Rs.5,00,000/-was demanded which he could not give and committed suicide.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that no abetment of suicide was ever done by the applicant. Applicant is a woman.

5. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that it is a case of honey trapping. The deceased was trapped by the applicant and co-accused, Nisha. The deceased made a video recording and levelled allegations against the applicant and co-accused.

6. The Court wanted to know as to what is the material recovered during the investigation suggesting that deceased was honey trapped.

7. Learned State Counsel could not indicate any such material.

8. Learned State Counsel would submit that there is a video recording of the deceased prio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document