Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A and gone through the record.
This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant- Krishnand Yadav @ Krishna Kumar Yadav, who is involved in case crime no. 17 of 2020 under Sections 498A, 304B, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Shankargarh, District- Prayagraj.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case only being husband of the deceased; that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant as love marriage and neither at the time of marriage or thereafter dowry was ever demanded by the applicant or his family members; that the deceased was a hypersensitive lady and she committed suicide by hanging herself; that according to the post mortem report no ante-mortem injury except ligature mark has been found on her body and cause of her death was ascertained to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging; that regarding the said incident an information to the informant and concerned police has been given by the applicant himself, on his information inquest was conducted but at that time no allegation whatsoever has been levelled either by the informant or by her any family member, however after 12 days from the incident the FIR has been lodged without any plausible explanation for delay; that no dying declaration of the deceased has been recorded to implicate the applicant in the present case. It is lastly contended that the accused applicant is languishing in jail since 1.2.2020 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial and thus, the applicant is entitled for indulgence.
Learned AGA opposed the submission made on behalf of the applicant and tried to justify the impugned order rejecting bail application by the Court below. It is further submitted that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage; that there is material evidence showing the complicity of the applicant; that the death of the deceased is unnatural within the premises of in-laws, for which the husband is responsible; that applicant is the husband of the deceased and liability of his wife is more than any other person.
Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case in my opinion the accused applicant is not entitled for bail.
The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 18.1.2021 Fhd.