Mickky’s bail plea in SC likely to come up for hearing today

Story Summary: 

Special Leave Petitions have been filed by the former minister for tourism, Francisco Pacheco alias Mickky and his former officer on special duty, Lyndon Monteiro before the Supreme Court of India challenging the order passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa, whereby the High Court had rejected the applications for anticipatory bail filed by Mickky and Lyndon.

PANAJI: Special Leave Petitions have been filed by the former minister for tourism, Francisco Pacheco alias Mickky and his former officer on special duty, Lyndon Monteiro before the Supreme Court of India challenging the order passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa, whereby the High Court had rejected the applications for anticipatory bail filed by Mickky and Lyndon.

The petitions are likely to be listed for hearing on Thursday before the vacation bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Mr Justice R M Lodha and Mr Justice A K Patnaik.

The High Court of Bombay had earlier rejected the anticipatory bail applications of both Mickky and Lyndon and being aggrieved by the same they have approached the Apex Court for anticipatory bail.

The High Court while rejecting the bail application of Lyndon noted that there was suppression of the fact by the applicant that he was asked to remain present before the High Court in the earlier application filed for anticipatory bail.

The Court while rejecting the application of the former minister observed that there was prima facie material on record showing the complexity of the applicant in the crime.

According to the reply filed by the State, there was intimate relationship between the applicant Mickky and the deceased Nadia, which is proved by the evidence of boarding pass of Qatar airways and the visiting cards of the deceased having office at Miami. The police had stated that the circumstantial evidence in the house and the room of the deceased was destroyed by cleaning up and it is most likely that the family members or some person connected to this offence had destroyed the evidence.

The prosecution had pointed out that apart from three surgical injuries there were eleven contusions on the forearm, wrist, thighs, legs, chest and shoulder of the deceased and that the doctor at Chennai had clarified that they were caused by a blunt object. The reply also showed that the applicant Mickky was in Mumbai on the day on which the statement of the victim had been recorded by the Special Executive Officer, Mumbai.

Earlier, the applications filed by both Mickky and Lyndon were rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Margao and therefore they had approached the High Court for anticipatory bail.

While rejecting the bail application of Lyndon, the Additional Sessions Judge had observed that a young lady had lost life and the circumstances under which she was shifted from one hospital to another that too out of Goa, created doubt about the involvement of the applicant also because he was present throughout along with the family members of the deceased and even helped them financially to pay the bills of the hospitals as well as transport facilities.