Learned AGA has filed an objection today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and Sri H.N. Singh and Sri B. Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the informant.
The appellant has been convicted in S.T. No. 246/2006 (State Vs. Jagat Pal @ Lalua) vide order dated 18.9.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Kanpur Dehat for offences under sections 498-A, 304-B, 316, 201 I.P.C. and the maximum sentence awarded to him is 10 years RI. The rest of the sentences are lesser sentences and all the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that there was no demand of dowry at the time of marriage and the other accused persons have already been acquitted by the trial Judge. He further submitted that there was no reason for the husband to assault his wife in such a brutal manner and commit her murder specially when the appellant has purchased immovable property in the name of her wife and opened an account in the bank. He further submitted that the alibi of other accused persons have already been accepted by the trial Judge and there was no reason for him not to accept the same in respect of appellant-husband. He further contended that when the trial Judge disbelieved the allegation of demand of dowry, alleged by the prosecution witnesses, then he could not have accepted the same only in respect of the husband by bifurcating the evidence into two parts. He further submitted that either the evidence has to be accepted as a whole or it has to be rejected all together. He further contended that the defence of the appellant is probalized by the fact that it is preposterous to cogitate that the appellant will murdered the deceased in his house and will carry the dead body at the precinct of the village and then throw it in an open field. He further submitted that the victim was pregnant by five months and looking to the fact that there was no demand of dowry by the family members, prosecution witnesses cannot be relied upon. He further submitted that even during the trial, appellant was in jail and after his conviction, he had remained in jail since September, 2008. Total period of incarceration cumulatively comes to more than four years. He further submitted that the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant conversely contended that the death occurred within three years of the marriage and there are extensive injuries on the body of the deceased and there are allegations of demand of dowry. They further submitted that the application under Section 113-B is there and, therefore, the appellant does not deserve to be released on bail.
Without entering into merit of the matter and looking to the fact of incarceration and the above noted argument along with the fact that the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, I consider it appropriate to release the appellant on bail.
Let the appellant Jagat Pal @ Lalua be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 lac with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Judge concerned in the above sessions trial for above offences. As soon as personal and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by trial Judge concerned to be kept on the record of this appeal.
The appellant is allowed one month time to deposit half of the amount of fine awarded to him. Rest half of the amount of fine shall remain stayed during the pendency of this appeal in this court.
Order Date :- 18.1.2010 AKG/-