Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6414 of 2019 Applicant :- Mukesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the offence only for being husband of deceased. In fact, there was accidental occurrence in which, she caught in flame. At the time of inquest, informant was present on spot, but the F.I.R. has been lodged approximately six days later, which creates doubt. Four years have been passed, but only PW-4 has been examined by trial court. There is no question of demand of dowry. Applicant is entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He has submitted that the victim has died with her unnatural death within 7 years of her marriage. F.I.R. indicates that there was demand of dowry and torture by applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant Ajay Kumar Yadav involved in Case Crime No.773 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Ghatampur, District-Kanpur Nagar is hereby rejected at this stage.
It is directed to the court concerned to decide the case expeditiously preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order according to law and keeping in mind provision of Section 309 Cr.P.C. without granting any unnecessary adjournment, if there is no legal impediment.
A copy of this order be transmitted to the Court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 SK Goswami