Prasagraj: High Court of Allahabad on Friday rejected Plea Guarantee Wife Amar Dubey who was one of the bicycle attacks in which eight police officers including police deputy supervisors (DYSP) and three sub-inspectors (SIS) were killed by Gangsters who were killed by Dubey Vikas and His accomplice.
The ambush took place on July 3, 2020 when the police went to arrest Vikas Dubey from his home in Bikru Village at Kanpur Nagar.
Vikas Dubey and his colleagues opened a fire indiscriminately on the police, which caused eight police personnel to be shot dead and six others suffered a sad shot injury.
Stopping the revised petition submitted by the wife of Amar Dubey, Justice JJ Munir observed, “The overall view of this case reminded the fact that the occurrence, where the revisionist was involved, not of the usual type.
Not only eight police eliminations in action and six others were injured It is a horrendous crime that surprises the conscience of the community, but also an action that attacks the root of the State Authority in his region.
“” This talks about the level of unexpected fear of the state in their minds containing and carrying out the Law, “said the court.
The court rejected the revised petition submitted by the wife of Amar Dubey, Aide and relatives of Vikas Dubey, a rejection that was challenging against the Plea of ​​the Guarantee by the High Court, seeking his release with a guarantee with the concerned council.
On September 1, 2020.
According to the Petitioner’s advisor, he was around 16 years old and 10 months on the incident and a few days before the incident, he married relatives of Vikas Dubey.
According to the Petitioner, he was not a member of the Dubey Vikas Gang, but his husband was a relative of Vikas and on the date of the incident, they went to Vikas’s house.
He did not have a role in the incident.
The state government opposed the plea guarantee on the land that was in accordance with the police statement that survived the terrible episode, teenagers were active participants throughout the attack.
He helped and avoided people not to let go of the police.
The next state government advisor argues, “Given that he is over 16 years old, and violations involved are vile, the Board has used, in the preliminary assessment, that the revisionist has the mental and physical capacity needed to commit.
Violations, as well as the ability to understand Consequently.
The council also considers the situation in which he commit a retailer and does all this, argues that it is suitable where the applicant deserves to be adults.
“Court while rejecting pleasure plea observing,” Prima Facie, if not at the middle stage of this evil action , Of course as an important player, the revisionist seems to have actively participated.
In circumstances, allowing the revisionist to run freely on guarantees that it will shake the faith of law-abiding citizens on the supremacy of the law and state authority.
If it must be done, it will definitely defeat the tip of justice.
” However, the court clarified that The statement made by it is limited to assessing a revisionist and supposedly guarantee request, not at all, understood or interpreted as a comment about the excess cases, namely assessed at the trial.