Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37760 of 2019 Applicant :- Bhanu Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; and the learned A.G.A. for the State; and perused the record.
This second bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.913 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Gunnaur, District Sambhal with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The first bail application No.18349 of 2019 was rejected by this Bench for non prosecution.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that though the applicant is the husband of the deceased but the postmortem report does not reveal any anti mortem injury except a ligature mark around the neck which suggests that the victim/deceased was not assaulted by the applicant. It has been submitted that the postmortem report indicates that death was due to asphyxia as a result of anti mortem hanging and therefore it appears to be a case of suicide. Moreover, the victim was found pregnant with 34 week old foetus, therefore it is unbelievable that any husband would harass his pregnant wife. It has been urged that the reason for suicide was that a property was purchased in the name of the mother of the applicant and not in the name of the deceased. It has been submitted that there are 14 prosecution witnesses to be examined, out of which, only three have so far been examined. It has been submitted that the applicant has suffered incarceration since 23.01.2018 and, in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the allegation it appears that the deceased died early morning or in the night which means that when she died, the husband was present in the house. It has been submitted that there are allegations that she had been harassed for demand of dowry. Moreover, there was no report to the police from the side of the applicant or his family as regards commission of suicide. It has been submitted that since trial is going on and three prosecution witnesses have already been examined, it would be appropriate that the trial be expedited.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant, at this stage, particularly, when the trial itself can be concluded shortly. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected with a direction upon the trial court to ensure expeditious conclusion of the trial, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Let a copy of this order be sent by the registry of this Court to the trial court concerned for information and compliance.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 AKShukla/-