Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39685 of 2018 Applicant :- Jahan @ Hemant Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar Misra
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant in Court today is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Amit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Jahan @ Hemant Kumar, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 334 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Highway, District Mathura during the pendency of the trial.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the applicant namely Jahan @ Hemant Kumar was solemnized with Nahni on 6.2.2017 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. From the aforesaid wedlock, a daughter was born. 14 days after the birth of the child, an unfortunate incident occurred on 23.3.2018, in which the wife of the applicant committed suicide by hanging herself. It is the case of the present applicant that the body of the deceased was recovered by the Police after breaking the door. The inquest of the body of the deceased was conducted on 27.3.2018 not on the information of the applicant or any of his family member but on the information given by the father of the deceased. The post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 24.3.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that the cause of death of the deceased was as a result of anti mortem hanging. The F.I.R. in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 23.3.2018 by the father of the deceased, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0334 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Highway, District Mathura. In the aforesaid F.I.R., seven persons namely, Sultan (Jeth), Jahan (husband), Vijjo (father-in-law), Smt. Lata (mother-in-law), Km. Priti (Sister-in-law), Kallu (cousin father- in-law), Smt. Raniya (counsin mohter-in-law) were nominated as the accused persons. From the perusal of the F.I.R. it is apparent that the allegations with regard to demand of dowry and commission of cruelty upon the deceased have been clearly made. Upon competition of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number, the Police submitted a charge- sheet dated 31.8.2018 against four of the named accused persons. Three of the named accused persons namely, Priti (Sister-in-law), Kallu (cousin father-in-law), Smt. Raniya (counsin mohter-in-law) were excluded. What has happened subsequent to the charge sheet dated 31.8.2018 has not been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the bail application or in the affidavit filed today in Court.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husaband of the deceased but he is innocent. The applicant is in jail since 28.4.2018. He has no criminal antecedent to his credit except the present one. From the perusal of the statement of the witness whose testimony has been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, it is submitted that the applicant has committed suicide and there is no evidence of any abetment on the part of the applicant. It is also urged that the prior to the incident, a daughter was born and in the aforesaid circumstances, it could not be assumed that the applicant would abet in the commission of the crime. It is thus submitted that the applicant be released on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the occurrence has taken place just after the period of one year and one month and 17 days from the date of marriage of the applicant. He has further invited the attention of the Court to the statement of Mithilesh who is the real sister of the deceased and wife of the brother of the applicant. The aforesaid witness in her statement has clearly implicated the present applicant. It is thus submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out and the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the evidence brought on record as well as the complicity of the applicant, I do not find any good reason to grant indulgence to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands rejected.
However, the trial court is expected to gear up the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial, if there is no other legal impediment.
Office is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the court concerned within a fortnight.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018/Arshad