Court No. - 21
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41345 of 2018 Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh,B.N.Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accused- applicant, Dinesh Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 231 of 2018, under Section 304 I.P.C. P.S.- Jalaun, District- Jalaun.
The first information version is that on 31.03.2017 at 9:00 a.m., the applicant Dinesh Kumar has dashed the deceased, wife of the complainant on R.C.C. stone, then she became unconscious due to head injury and taken to the hospital, where she died during treatment on 05.04.2017.
The complainant had moved an application before the higher authority as well as the S.H.O. of police station concerned for lodging the FIR. In spite of several applications, no FIR was lodged against the accused persons. Thereafter, the complainant moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate concerned for lodging the FIR and investigate the matter. The Magistrate concerned vide order dated 02.06.2018 directed the police concerned to register the case and investigate the matter. On the aforesaid direction of the Magistrate, the FIR was lodged and the present applicant has been named in the FIR. The specific role has been assigned to the applicant who dashed the deceased on R.C.C. stone, in which she succumbed to the head injuries.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR was lodged after three months from the date of incident on the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history as said in paragraph 19 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application.
The learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and the specific role has been assigned to the applicant; that the deceased had died due to head injury and the post mortem report also supports the FIR version, therefore, the prayer for bail be rejected.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, and, in particular, the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits, does not find it to be a fit case for bail at this stage. The bail application stands rejected at this stage.
The application is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 Imroz