Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant be taken on record.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is husband of the deceased. The marriage of the applicant was solemnized about three years ago with deceased. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. There are two children from the wedlock of applicant and deceased. The applicant has not harassed or tortured to the deceased. It has further been submitted that there is general allegation against the applicant. No specific role has been assigned to him. At the time of the alleged incident the applicant was not present at his house and he has gone to market when he returned back he saw his wife lying dead. It has further been submitted that the applicant has informed to his in-laws about alleged incident. In post-mortem report the cause of death of deceased could not be ascertained, therefore, the viscera was preserved. In viscera report insecticide poison has been found. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. False allegation has been made against him. The statements of informant Ashok Kumar, Ramkali and Smt. Malti have been recorded as PW-1 to PW-3. The complainant Ashok Kumar (PW-1) in his examination-in-chief has supported the prosecution version but in his cross-examination he has stated that there was no dispute of demand of dowry. The deceased has not informed him about demand of dowry. This witness has been declared hostile. PW-2 Ramkali and PW-3 Smt. Malti (mother and Bhabhi of the deceased) have not supported the prosecution version in their statements and they have been declared hostile. There is no other cogent evidence against the applicant. There is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 17.04.2014.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Chandra Shekhar Rawat involved in Case Crime No.312 of 2014, Under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Makhi, District Unnao, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and cooperate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 13.1.2016 Jitendra