The District Court rejects anticipatory bail application of Ritika Maloo in Mercedes Ramjhula accident case in Nagpur.
Mohd Hussain Mustafa and Mohd Ateef Ziya – who were mowed down by a speeding Mercedes allegedly driven by Ritika alias Ritu Maloo on February 25 on Ram Jhula bridge.
The court on March 13 had granted an ad-interim bail protection to accused Ritika Maloo. After final arguments The district and additional sessions court decide accused Ritika’s fate on Friday.
On February 25, Ritika was arrested few hours after the accident by the Tehsil police under bailable 304A of Indian penal code (IPC) for causing death due to rash and negligent driving. She was given bail within couple of hours by court.
On February 29, Regional Forensic Science Laboratory (RFSL) confirmed alcohol in Ritika’s blood samples. The findings forced police to invoke non-bailable 304 (II) IPC for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The section was added to the FIR, following court’s permission, on March 2.
In the meantime, police approached judicial magistrate first class (JMFC) seeking permission to arrest Ritika under fresh provisions of a stricter law under 304 (II) IPC added in the FIR. The lower court rejected the police plea, compelling the prosecution to file a revision against the order before the sessions court. Ritika’s counsel too filed the anticipatory bail plea, sensing police’s strategy to take her custody for interrogation.
Ritika with friend, Madhuri Sarda, was on her way back to home at Wardhaman Nagar when her Mercedes car rammed the side wall of the bridge and then crashed into a scooter, which was driven Hussain and Ateef was riding pillion. Both died. The two women fled the scene while the injured were rushed to Mayo hospital. Ritika and Madhuri were returning from CP Club after dinner. Police had collected CCTV footage of the club and seized their liquor bills, which are now part of evidence in the case.