Heard Sri Kuldeep Singh Chahar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Anil Kumar @ Ghantoli seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 1148 of 2017, under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Shikohabad, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the marriage between the applicant and the deceased Smt. Surabhi Yadav was a love marriage and as such there was no question of any demand of dowry whatsoever. It is argued that the applicant and the deceased were both unemployed and were in the search of employment and due the said reason, she became frustrated and committed suicide. It is argued that the trial in the present case has started, in which, two witnesses have been examined in the year 2018 but after that the trial is not proceeding. It is argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 20 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.01.2018.
Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and the learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the marriage of the applicant with the deceased was solemnized on 22.04.2015 whereas the present incident took place on 02.12.2017 which is after about two years and seven months of the marriage. It is argued that the death of the lady was on account of asphyxia as a result of hanging within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial home and there are allegations of demand of dowry also. It is further argued that since the trial in the present case is under progress, the release of the applicant at this stage is not proper. It is further argued that the applicant has not given any plausible explanation regarding the death of his wife in his house. Learned counsel for the first informant undertakes before this Court that he shall produce the witnesses before the trial court on the date fixed without any fail so that the trial may proceed and will not be delayed due to the non appearance of the witnesses of fact.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records, I do not find it a fit case for bail.
Considering the totality of the case in particular, nature of evidence available on record, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.
The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
However, at this stage, learned counsel states that a direction may be given to the trial court for expeditious disposal of trial. Accordingly, looking to the period of incarceration, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and make an endeavour to conclude the same, strictly in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C., preferably within a period of six months, without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, subject to any legal impediment.
Further, it is expected that the undertaking of learned counsel for the first informant will be complied in letter and spirit without undue delay and excuse.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 12.1.2021 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)