Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8467 of 2021 Applicant :- Gulfam Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai,Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant involved in Case Crime No.423 of 2020, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. The applicant is husband of deceased and he has no motive to commit the murder of his wife. There is no eye-witness of alleged incident. Learned counsel has submitted that in fact at the time of alleged incident, applicant was residing at his village Mandapa, which is at a distance of 40 Km. from Khurja, where deceased was residing along with her children and that it was a Covid-19 pandemic period and it was not possible for applicant to visit Khurja from his village. It has been further submitted that even the alleged witnesses have stated that before incident, applicant was residing at his village. It was stated that the first informant has made improvement in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and that statements of children of deceased to the effect that they have seen the applicant, while he was having a knife in his hand are false and such statements have been made under pressure of first informant. It has also been stated by learned counsel that as per prosecution, alleged incident took place on 27.05.2020 at 5.00 AM and that inquest proceedings were commenced at 7.00 AM and in the inquest proceedings, it was mentioned that deceased has suffered death due to injury caused by some sharp weapon and applicant was not shown as assailant and thus, it appears that after that in FIR, which was lodged at 8.14 hours, applicant was falsely named in the FIR. Regarding alleged recovery of knife, it has been argued that there is no independent witness of alleged recovery and that there is no such F.S.L. report that the alleged blood stains lying on the knife were of human blood. It was further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 28.05.2020 having no criminal history and that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant is husband of deceased and that on the night of incident, he was sleeping along with his wife and children. Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that in the statements of children of the deceased, namely, Samir, Sadil and Km. Aisha, they all have said that at about 5.00 AM, when they awoke after hearing cry of their mother, they saw that applicant, having a knife, was standing there and thereafter, he was ran away from the spot. It was also submitted that recovery of knife used in the alleged incident has also been made at the instance of applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant Gulfam is hereby rejected.
However, keeping in view of period of incarceration of applicant, trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same as early as possible from the date of filing a copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 23.9.2021 Neeraj