JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh, J.
1. This application has been filed by the applicant Awadesh Verma with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 884 of 2007 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S. Kotwali district Farrukhabad.
2. The facts of the case in brief are that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Rajiv Kumar Verma on 9.7.2007 at about 8.15 a.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 8.7.2007. The F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant and five other co-accused persons. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. It is alleged that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant about five years of the alleged incident but after the marriage the applicant and other co-accused persons demanded Rs. 50,000/- and one motorcycle as a dowry and to full fill the demand of dowry they subjected the deceased to cruelty, its complaint was made by the deceased to the first informant and other family members, they tried to persuade the first informant and others, even a Panchayat was arranged but the applicant and other co-accused persons continued to harass the deceased to fulfil the demand of dowry, on 8.7.2007 at about 5.00 p.m. the first informant was informed by the deceased on a telephone that she was being subjected to cruelty by her in laws to fulfil the demand of dowry of Rs. 50,000/- and to provide a motorcycle, but she could not make the complete conversation because the telephone was disconnected and on that information the first informant, his father left their village and proceeded to' the house of the applicant, when they reached there at about 12 O'clock in the night, they saw that the deceased was killed by way of administering the poison. The dead body of the deceased was lying there. The incident was witnessed by Sudhanshu alias Lala, younger brother of the deceased, who was residing at the house of the applicant. On the information given by the first informant, inquest report was prepared and thereafter the post mortem examination was conducted. According to the post mortem examination report the deceased had sustained two ante mortem injures in which injury No. l was abraded contusion 3 cm x 2 cm on the middle of forehead, 5 cm above from the base of the nose, injury No. 2 was contusion 1 cm x 0.5 cm on the outer side of foot. The cause of death could not be ascertained, hence the viscera was preserved. The viscera report has been received in which organochloro insecticide poison was found. The applicant applied for bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1 Farrukhabad who rejected the same on 3.11.2007, being aggrieved from the order dated 3.1.2007 the present bail application has been moved by the applicant.
3. Heard Sri V.C. Misra, Senior Advocate Assisted by Sri Vivek Mishra and Sri Akhil Kumar Shukla learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.
It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant:
1. That the applicant is the husband of the deceased. There are general allegations against the applicant and five other co-accused persons who are father, mother and brothers of the appliant The allegation in respect of demand of dowry and subjecting the deceased to cruelty is absolutely false and baseless.
2. That the relations of the applicant were cordial with the deceased. The deceased was living under the depression because even after five years of her marriage, she was having no child. She was provided medical aid since 9.9.2002 in Sarin Nursing Home Lohai Road, Farrukhabad, her blood test and other necessarily required tests were done but under the depression she consumed poison and died. The cause of death was not on account of the demand of dowry or cruelty.
3. In the present case fair investigation has not been done even the statements of the neighbours were not recorded by the I.O. and no statement has been recorded by the I.O. from the side of the defence.
4. That all the accused persons have been released on bail and there is general allegation against the applicant and other co-accused persons.
5. That the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence in the night of the said incident. He had gone to the house of his maternal uncle Shyam Singh Verma resident of Imaliya P.S. Shamshabad district Farrukhabad where he got the information on his mobile phone, then he came to the place of occurrence.
6. That the deceased has sustained two ante mortem injuries because after consuming the poison she became unconscious and fell down. The applicant is innocent, he is^ having no criminal antecedent. He is in jail since July, 2007. therefore, he may be released on bail.
4. In reply to the above contentions it is submitted by the learned A.G.A.:
1. That the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased had died within five years of her marriage. There was specific demand of dowry even on the day of the alleged incident the deceased was subjected to cruelty to fulfil the demand of dowry. The brother of the deceased is an eye witness of the alleged incident, he had supported the prosecution version, in his presence mar-peet was done and she was brought in a room where forcefully the poison was administered. The witness Sudhanshu, went inside the room after opening the door and saw that his sister died. He gave a telephonic message to the family members. According to his statement the applicant has actively participated in the commission of the alleged offence. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by the medical examination report because the deceased had sustained two ante mortem injuries, which shows that forcefully the poison was administered, in viscera report also organochloro insecticide poison was found. The death of the deceased was unnatural. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with the case of other co-accused persons. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. Therefore, he is not entitled to get the benefit of parity with other co-accused.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and from the perusal of the record, it appears that the death of the deceased was unnatural within a period of seven years of her marriage, she was allegedly subjected to cruelty soon before her death to fulfil the demand of dowry. There is an eye witness also and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the prayer for bail is refused.
Accordingly this application is rejected.