TT Epaper
The Telegraph
 
CIMA Gallary

Mamta in jail remand

A city court on Monday denied bail to Mamta Agarwal and two guards in the 9A Short Street case after police submitted that she “had stacked a large amount of ammunition… to kill anyone” who would try to acquire the property.

“She may have retaliated against the bouncers in self-defence. But in this case she has clearly exceeded the limit till which the right to self-defence can be exercised,” the chief metropolitan magistrate of Bankshall court, Viswaroop Sett, observed while sending Mamta to judicial custody for 14 days.

Mamta was arrested on November 11 in connection with the gunning down of two bouncers, who were part of a group that had trespassed on 9A apparently in an attempt to vacate the property. Mamta used to stay and run a playschool at 9A.

Mamta’s counsel Susanta Dutta submitted that his client had acted in self-defence, citing Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code which reads: “Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.”

The magistrate, however, cut him short, saying: “You better go through Section 99 to understand the cases where the right to self-defence does not apply”.

Public prosecutor Krishna Chandra Das began his submission saying Mamta had exceeded her limit while exercising the right to self-defence and ended up killing two men.

“Mamta Agarwal had stacked a large amount of ammunition, which suggests she was prepared to kill anyone who would try to acquire the property. Moreover, neither the gun nor the property belongs to her. The CCTV footage shows her and the two others shooting at the trespassers at point-blank range,” Das submitted.

He pleaded for an extension of the police custody of Mamta on the grounds that a test identification parade was pending. The magistrate, however, rejected the plea for extension of police custody.

The two guards arrested with Mamta — Shafique Ahmed (Pappu) and Pramod Shaw — have been sent to judicial custody for the same duration as her.