Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8249 of 2019 Applicant :- Jay Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Tripurari Pal,Akhilesh Kumar Shukla,Praveen Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated for committing dowry death of his wife; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Geetam Singh, his daughter Manwati was married to applicant on 29.4.2017 and was being treated with cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry and subsequently on 10.9.2017 information of her death was given to her Maika; that applicant neither made any demand of dowry nor treated deceased with cruelty for non- fulfilment of demand of dowry; that post-mortem report of deceased states that her death was caused due to asphyxia as a result of throttling; that applicant did not throttle deceased to death; that trial is in progress and during trial first informant Geetam Singh and his brother Ramveer Singh have been examined, who have not supported prosecution case and have turned hostile, copies of whose statements have been filed at S.A.-1 & 2; that thereafter statement of one Jaiveer Singh, uncle of deceased has also been recorded, who has also not supported prosecution case; that co-accused Puran Singh and Chandrawati, parents-in-law of deceased have been granted bail by this Court; that no offence is made out against applicant; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 7.10.2017.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed prayer of bail and contended that dowry death of deceased has been committed within 5 months of marriage in other than normal circumstances by throttling and if being influential applicant has win over some of prosecution witnesses, he may not be held innocent in view of presumption of dowry death against him under Section 113(B) of Indian Evidence Act; that if applicant is released on bail, shall misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is not entitled for bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail.
The bail application of applicant Jay Prakash in Case Crime No.761 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kasganj, District Kasganj, is rejected accordingly.
However, the trial court is requested to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 Kpy