Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42563 of 2018 Applicant :- Smt. Bablee Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,P.S.Pundeer.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ramesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Smt. Bablee, seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Biharigarh, District Saharanpur during the pendency of the trial.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the son of the applicant namely Anuj Kumar was solemnized with Seema Devi on 4.5.2017 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. After the expiry of a period of one year and two months from the date of marriage of the son of the applicant, the daughter-in- law of the applicant namely Seema Devi died on 7.7.2018. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 7.7.2018 not on the information of the applicant or any of her family members but on the information given by the father of the deceased namely, Nathiram. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the nature of the death of the deceased was said to be homicidal. Post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 7.7.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia as a result of anti mortem strangulation. Apart from the aforesaid, no external injury was found on the body of the deceased. The F.I.R. in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 7.7.2018, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0064 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Biharigarh, District Saharanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., three persons namely, Anuj (husband), Sukhpal (father-in-law), Smt. Babli (mother-in-law) were nominated as the accused persons. Upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number, the Police submitted a charge- sheet dated 26.7.2018 against the aforesaid named accused persons. Subsequent to the submission of the charge sheet, cognizance has been taken by the court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 12.9.2018. What has happened subsequent to the cognizance taking order dated 12.9.2018 has not been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the bail application nor the same has been disclosed at the time of the hearing of the bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the mohter -in-law of the deceased. The applicant is an old lady. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to her credit except the present one. The applicant is in jail since 12.7.2018. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the son of the applicant and her daughter-in-law had a quarrel and in the aforesaid quarrel, the daughter-in-law of the applicant died. He, thus submits that the applicant is innocent and is therefore, liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that according to the post mortem report, the deceased has died on account of asphyxia as a result of anti mortem strangulation. The occurrence has taken place within seven years of the marriage of the son of the applicant as well as in the house of the applicant. Therefore burden to prove the innocence is upon the applicant for which there is no material on the record up to this stage. The bail application of the father- in-law namely Sukhpal has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 2.11.2018. Accordingly, it is urged that the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the evidence brought on record as well as the complicity of the applicant, I do not find any good reason to grant indulgence to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands rejected.
However, the trial court is expected to gear up the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial, if there is no other legal impediment.
Office is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the court concerned within a fortnight.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 Arshad