Imphal: A woman, after remaining in police custody for three days, was granted bail in a kidnapping case by Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Imphal East, on 9th September, after the first bail plea was not granted on 7th September.
The accused woman, identified as Kamalapati Leima, 52, was kept in police custody under Lamlai Police Station on 6th September, 2022, in connection with an FIR registered on the basis of report filed by the complainant Maibam Tomba Singh stating that her niece, Maibam Sophia Devi, was kidnapped by Sanasam Bimol and his associates from Ningol Fast food, Sawombung Opp. Namjoklung High School, Sawombung on 4th September, 2022. However, in the said FIR, the name of the accused woman was not mentioned.
The accused person was produced in the Court of CJM Imphal East on 7th September, but her bail plea was rejected and thereafter kept in police remand till 9th September. In the meantime, the counsel of the accused withdrew from the case and later another counsel was engaged by the accused.
On 9th September, the accused was again produced before the Court of CJM Imphal East with prayer by APP for the State for judicial custody of the accused till 23rd September. On the day, the accused was represented by her counsel, N. Bupenda Meitei, Advocate.
Remand petition and bail petition were taken up together for consideration and disposal before the CJM. Ld. APP submitted that during the course of investigation it was revealed that the main accused Sanasam Bimol Singh is the estranged husband of the victim Sophia Devi, and the present accused had tried in the past to unite the victim with her husband.
On the other hand, Ld. Counsel N. Bupenda Meitei, appearing for the accused, argued that the arrest of the accused was in violation of the direction of the Supreme Court in D. K. Basu’s case and Arnesh Kumar’s case. Ld. Counsel for the accused also cited Satendra Kumar vs CBI in favour of his prayer for the bail.
After the perusal of the records and hearing both the Ld. APP and the counsel for the accused, the Court recorded that although the whereabouts of the victim was still unknown, the accused was not stated to be directly involved in the abduction and the wrongful confinement of the victim, and her custodial interrogation was also already over.
The court found sufficient grounds in the circumstances and hence granted bail to the accused on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 50,000 and surety of like amount with conditions. The remand petition and bail petition were accordingly disposed of.
