Thursday, July 18, 2024
HomeNewsLegalBombay High Court Grants Transit Anticipatory Bail to Woman Alleging Actor Ravi...

Bombay High Court Grants Transit Anticipatory Bail to Woman Alleging Actor Ravi Kishan Fathered Her Daughter

The Bombay High Court has granted a two-week transit anticipatory bail to Aparna Soni, who claimed that actor and BJP Member of Parliament (MP) Ravi Kishan is the father of her daughter

The bail was also granted to her husband Rajesh Soni and daughter Shinova Soni.

Background of the Case

Justice RN Laddha heard the anticipatory bail plea following an FIR lodged by Ravi Kishan’s wife, Preeti Shukla, at Hazratganj police station in Lucknow. The FIR accused Aparna Soni and her family of blackmailing, threatening the actor and his family, and attempting to extort ₹20 crores.

Court’s Observations

During the hearing, the Additional Public Prosecutor for Maharashtra opposed the pre-arrest bail, citing the need for the accused’s custody. However, Justice Laddha questioned the prosecutor’s role, noting that the offence was not registered in Maharashtra and the state had not investigated the case.

Arguments Against Bail

Advocate Aniket Nikam, representing Preeti Shukla, opposed the bail, pointing out that the FIR was filed on April 16, 2024. He noted that the trio had sought anticipatory bail on April 20, which was rejected by the Dindoshi court on May 6. Nikam argued that the defendants had not sought bail from a competent court in Lucknow and had not been protected from arrest while their petition was pending in the High Court.

Defense Arguments

Advocate Parth Sanghrajka, representing the trio, argued that Ravi Kishan’s significant influence in the area justified their apprehension. He also mentioned that one of their lawyers had been made an accused in the case.

Nikam countered, saying the defendants were prolonging the matter, holding press conferences, making allegations, and not appearing threatened.

Court’s Decision

The bench acknowledged that the Maharashtra prosecution had limited involvement but emphasized imposing conditions to prevent misuse of the relief granted. Justice Laddha clarified that the court had not assessed the merits of the case or the accused’s entitlement. The bench provided temporary protection to the trio to approach a competent court in Lucknow, stipulating they could not leave Maharashtra except to file their application in Lucknow.

Share your news, articles, deals, columns, or press releases with us! Click the link to submit and join our platform today.

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular

Recent Comments