Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7386 of 2018 Applicant :- Kripalo Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Arun Srivastav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 1074 of 2017, under Sections 304 I.P.C., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly, during the pendency of trial.
As per FIR, the prosecution's case is that the deceased, son of the first informant had gone to his Sasural at the ceremony of Bhai Dooj with his wife Smt. Surajmukhi, there he was beaten badly by the present accused along with three other co-accused by an iron rod with an intention to kill. The deceased succumbed to the injuries later on within three days.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the marriage had been solemnized between the daughter of the present accused with the deceased in the year 2010 thereafter she was ousted from the matrimonial house in 2011, whereafter a case under Section 498A IPC was launched against the deceased. Besides that, a case of divorce was also filed by the deceased in the year 2013, which is still pending. In these circumstances, there was no opportunity/circumstance for the deceased to visit the house of the accused. The deceased had died somewhere else after having taken liquor and may have got injured in some other manner. The accused-applicant has been falsely implicated, she is 62 years old lady, who could not use iron rod for beating the deceased. He has further contended that the post-mortem report also does not corroborate the prosecution version because the measurement of the iron rod which is shown, was not such which would normally be found. Applicant is in jail since 1.11.2017.
Learned A.G.A. has contended on the other side that wife of the deceased Smt. Surajmukhi has stated in her statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. that altercation had taken place between the deceased and his mother-in-law and pursuant to that the other accused Vikki, Baljeet and Jagjeet had beaten the deceased badly.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, this case is not found to be a fit case for bail. It is accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 A.P. Pandey