She had no knowledge that deceased would be beaten so badly: Delhi High Court grants bail to woman whose paramour was killed by her husband

The Delhi High Court recently granted bail to a woman who was allegedly having an extra-martial affair with a man till her husband got to know about it and purportedly killed her paramour [Jyoti v. State]..Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar noted that there was nothing in the disclosure statement that revealed that the woman, at any point in time, had the knowledge that the victim would be killed. Her role was stated to be of having dropped the lover near the place of incident.“…she is young lady and mother of two minor children, her husband Sachin is also in judicial custody, therefore, petitioner is admitted to bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial court concerned,” the Court said..The woman was purportedly in an extra-marital affair with her tutor who was prepping her for the Central Teachers Eligibility Test. They allegedly developed intimate ties during the tutorials, which the woman’s husband later learnt about.The woman tried to persuade her lover to call off their relationship, but the man was adamant in continuing the ties with her. He allegedly told the woman that he was in possession of a video of them in a compromising position and threatened to circulate it if she didn’t abide by his whims..According to the prosecution, the woman tried to make him understand that she was married with two minor children, and asked him to return the purported video.“The petitioner wanted the video recordings made by the deceased back from him so as to save her image in the society, and for that purpose, the petitioner narrated the entire facts to her husband,” the bail order noted.The woman thereafter was stated to have called the man to an apartment where she told him that her husband wanted to talk to him. She dropped him near the apartment and returned to her husband’s shop. At the apartment, however, the man was stated to have been thrashed to death by her husband and his associates..The accused were subsequently arrested and a case was registered against them under Sections 302 (murder), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. This prompted the woman to approach the High Court for bail..Before the High Court, her counsel submitted that she had only dropped the deceased near the apartment as her husband wanted to talk to him, and to take the video from him. It was also submitted that the woman was not aware as to what transpired in the apartment.The Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the woman’s bail application, contending she was part of the conspiracy and that the victim had been “brutally beaten to death.” Further, he pointed out that videos of the episode were made by the co-accused persons and handed over to the woman.As far as the woman’s antecedents go, a status report showed the court that there was no previous involvement.“The petitioner wanted the video recordings made by the deceased back from him so as to save her image in the society, and for that purpose, the petitioner narrated the entire facts to her husband… Nothing is appearing on record to show that petitioner at any point of time had any knowledge that deceased would be beaten so badly or what would be done with the petitioner by other co-accused once he was in the said apartment,” highlighted the order..The Court also clarified that nothing stated in the order would tantamount to the opinions on the case’s merits.The petitioner was represented by Advocates Jitender Sethi and Hemant Gulati whereas Additional Public Prosecutor Rajni Gupta represented the State..[Read the order]