Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12705 of 2016 Applicant :- Mahesh Chandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Purushottam Dixit,Bhupendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 299 of 2015, under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Bharthna, District Etawah is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that according to the prosecution case Km. Luxmi daughter of the applicant was having love affair with one Govind on account of which on 27th July, 2015 the applicant along with his three other family members committed honour killing of Luxmi and then threw the dead body of Luxmi in river Senger. It is submitted that the daughter of the applicant had died her natural death at the age of 17 years, while the age of the dead body of the girl recovered from the river Senger was about 28 years. On the basis of statements of two persons that the dead body recovered from the river Senger was that of the daughter of the applicant, he and his other family members have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that there is neither any direct nor circumstantial evidence indicating at the complicity of the applicant in the commission of the crime. He further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered either from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. It is next submitted that the applicant who has no criminal antecedents to his credit and is in jail since 10th August, 2016, is entitled to be enlarged on bail Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in this case the applicant has been an accused of having committed murder of his own daughter with the help of his other family members and thrown her dead body in the river Senger, because she dared to have an affair with a boy of her own choice. He further submitted that witnesses including Gram Pradhan Suresh of Gram Khanpura and Randheer Singh Yadav and Satyaveer Singh residents of the same village as the applicant, in their statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure during investigation have categorically stated that they had seen the dead body of the deceased in her house before it was thrown by the applicant and his other family members in the river. The clothes and mobile of the deceased, which were recovered during investigation, were identified by the applicant himself as those of his daughter. The medical report of the deceased further indicates that she had been beaten mercilessly by her assailants with fists, kicks and sticks. In view of the above the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial.
After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage of trial. The prayer for bail is refused.
However considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the trial court is directed the conclude the trial of the applicant within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. In case the trial of the applicant is not concluded within the period stipulated hereinabove, the applicant may move fresh bail application before this Court.
Subject to aforesaid direction, this bail application stands finally disposed of.
(B.K. Narayana, J.) Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Sushil/-