Dr. Shikha Mishra
Defence argues BNS Sections 308(5) and 308(7) are not applicable; alleged discrepancies in surety documents await official confirmation
Lead Reporting
Dehradun: Actress Urmila Sanawar has been granted bail by an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) court in a blackmail and criminal intimidation case registered by Haridwar police. However, her release from prison has reportedly been delayed after discrepancies emerged during verification of the two sureties submitted to secure her bail. Reports that the sureties were found allegedly fraudulent, and that bail was subsequently cancelled, are yet to be confirmed through an official court order or verification report.
Her counsel, Preeti Chauhan, said the bail application was heard at around 1 pm, with arguments focusing on Sections 308(5) and 308(7) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. She maintained that the ingredients required to invoke these provisions were not made out against Sanawar. According to the defence, the court accepted this argument and granted bail.
The court reportedly ordered her release on a personal bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of an equivalent amount. The subsequent verification process, however, has held up her release.
The prosecution opposed bail, citing 10–11 cases allegedly registered against Sanawar in different districts and expressing apprehension that she could release further videos targeting other individuals if released. Chauhan said the court had initially sought satisfactory sureties after concerns were raised about the relationship of the persons presented as guarantors.
FIR invoked multiple legal provisions
Sanawar was arrested on October 25 from her residence in Govind Nagar, Saharanpur, following a complaint by Deepika Rathore, daughter of former BJP MLA Suresh Rathore. Haridwar police registered FIR No. 387/26 at Ranipur police station, alleging blackmail, a demand for ₹5 crore and threats to kill.
The FIR reportedly invokes BNS Sections 308(5) and 308(7), relating to aggravated forms of extortion; Section 79, concerning words, gestures or acts intended to insult a woman's modesty; and Sections 356(2) and 356(3), concerning defamation. It also cites Sections 4 and 10 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.
Under BNS Section 308(5), extortion involving fear of death or grievous hurt can attract imprisonment of up to 10 years and a fine. Section 308(7) provides for punishment of up to 10 years where extortion is committed by threatening a person with an accusation of a serious offence. Section 79 provides for imprisonment of up to three years and a fine.
The complainant alleged that Sanawar made objectionable and defamatory remarks about her and her family on social media. She further alleged that Sanawar called her on October 24, demanding ₹5 crore from her father and pressuring the family to transfer property associated with Ravidas Dham in her name. The complaint also alleged threats and the circulation of photographs and videos intended to damage her reputation. These allegations remain subject to investigation and judicial determination.
Police said Sanawar was arrested within approximately 12 hours of receiving the complaint and that the mobile phone allegedly used in the incident was recovered. She was subsequently remanded to 14 days of judicial custody and lodged in Roshanabad District Jail.
Arrest came amid Ankita Bhandari case controversy
Sanawar's arrest came amid the controversy surrounding viral audio and video clips concerning an alleged VIP connection in the Ankita Bhandari murder case. The CBI had issued notices to Sanawar and Suresh Rathore, and both appeared before the CBI court in Dehradun on October 23 in proceedings concerning proposed narco and polygraph tests.
Sanawar had claimed that she possessed information about the alleged VIP and expressed willingness to undergo a narco test. The authenticity of the viral recordings and the claims made in them remain matters for investigation. Dushyant Kumar Gautam has denied the allegations against him, describing them as an attempt to damage his reputation.
With the surety verification now emerging as a separate hurdle, Sanawar's immediate release will depend on the outcome of the verification process and any further directions issued by the court.
