Chandigarh stalking case: HC to hear Vikas Barala’s bail plea on November 29

Chandigarh stalking case: HC to hear Vikas Barala’s bail plea on November 29

Vikas Barala, son of Haryana BJP president Subhash Barala, and Ashish Kumar are in judicial custody in the stalking case of Varnika Kundu, the daughter of a Haryana IAS officer.

vikas barala, chandigarh stalking case, vikas barala bail plea, ashish kumar, varnika kundu stalker, subhash barala son, indian express
Vikas Barala (in sky blue shirt) and Ashish Kumar were sent to judicial custody till August. (Express Photo/Jasbir Malhi/Files)

After the lower court refused to grant relief to Haryana BJP president Subhash Barala’s son Vikas Barala, the Punjab and Haryana High Court will hear his plea for regular bail on November 29 in the case of stalking and attempted abduction of Varnika Kundu, the daughter of a Haryana IAS officer.

Chandigarh Additional Sessions Judge Rajnish Kumar Sharma on November 13 had rejected Vikas’s plea for regular bail, saying the allegations against the accused, “the gravity and seriousness of the offences involved” and there is no ground “on the basis of which the concession of regular bail” can be given to him. This had been his fourth and final unsuccessful attempt to walk out of the prison on bail before the lower court.

The case in the High Court was filed through advocate Parveen Kaushik and is likely to be argued by a senior lawyer. In the lower court, his counsel had said, “The entire story is concocted and false. The stand of the victim and her father are at variance with each other.”

Varnika’s statement was on Wednesday recorded by the trial court where she identified both the accused, Vikas and his friend Ashish. The case is now listed for hearing on December 6 and charges under IPC sections for stalking (354D), wrongful restraint (341) and abduction attempt (365/511) have already been framed against the accused.


The stalking and attempted abduction case had sparked outrage across the country, including Chandigarh, in August. A public interest litigation had also been filed in the High Court by a lawyer after the incident. However, the PIL was withdrawn after a division bench observed that only the aggrieved parties in a criminal case have the right to file PIL and asserted that the High Court would have no problem in taking up the case if Varnika herself moved court in case of any grievance.