Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31032 of 2021 Applicant :- Krishna Chand Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Nagendra Bahadur Singh holding brief of Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.B. Maurya, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Krishna Chand, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.23 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station Sindhora, District Varanasi.
The FIR of the present case was lodged on 13.12.2020 by Shyam Lal Khairvar, the father of the deceased, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act alleging therein that the marriage of the deceased with Krishna Chand, the applicant was solemnized on 07.05.2017 in which he had given dowry and gifts as per his status but her husband and family members demanded Rs.one lakh and motorcycle as a dowry and the demand continued due to which his daughter was tortured and harassed. On 12.12.2020 in the night his daughter was assaulted and she has been murdered and then hanged regarding which he received an information on which he went there and found her daughter lying on bed. His daughter is aged about 23 years.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the deceased and the applicant were having a dispute with regards to property with Phago Ram alias Bhishma Ram, the father of the applicant regarding which a compromise was entered into between them at the first instance on 14.07.2019 after which the deceased and the applicant threatened the father of the applicant for which he gave application dated 26.05.2019 to the police and then again moved an application dated 14.11.2019 before the police stating therein that he has made separate arrangement of living of the deceased and her husband but they are not going there and are entering in further dispute. Annexure 3 has been placed and para 9 of the affidavit has been placed to buttress the said arguments. It is argued that as such due to the dispute with regards to property with her father-in-law, the deceased committed suicide and died. Even the factum of suicide is suggestive from the postmortem report where the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of hanging. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 12 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.12.2020.
Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The death of the deceased took place within four years of marriage in her matrimonial house which is unnatural. There is no plausible explanation coming from the side of the applicant as to why his wife committed suicide and even as to how she died in her matrimonial house. With regards to para 9 and annexure no.3 of the affidavit, there is no instructions from the police station with regards to any such application being given to the police. Although the doctor has found a ligature mark on the body of the deceased and the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of hanging but the doctor opened the scalp of the deceased and found 7 cm. x 5 cm. hematoma present on the frontal region of the brain which is a deep seated injury which would go to show that the deceased was assaulted soon before her death. The said injury has no explanation at all as to how it has been on the body of the deceased, as such the bail application of the applicant be rejected.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the deceased died an unnatural death in her matrimonial house within seven years of marriage. There is an allegation against the applicant. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. Apart from the ligature mark, there is big hematoma present on the frontal region of the brain which has been found by the doctor conducting the postmortem. There is no explanation coming forth with regards to said injury at all. The dispute with regards to property is not verified by the police specifically with regards to application as alleged to have been given to them.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 7.10.2021 Gaurav