Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49284 of 2018 Applicant :- Nand Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Nand Lal, seeking his enlargement on bail in Sessions Trial No. 224 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 95 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC, and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Bakewar, District Fatehpur, during the pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased, however he is innocent. The applicant is in jail since 8.6.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. The absence of any external ante mortem injury on the body of the deceased speaks of the bona fide of the present applicant. It is then submitted that the applicant was present all along inquest proceedings which further go to show the bona fide of the present applicant. Lastly, it is urged that the applicant is only class 4 pass, whereas, the deceased had obtained a graduation degree and on account of the aforesaid disparity in the educational qualifications of the applicant and the deceased, the deceased felt humiliation. It is in the aforesaid background that the deceased committed suicide. It is thus urged that the present applicant even though, he is the husband of the deceased is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the deceased was a young lady aged about 25 years. The deceased has died at her matrimonial home just after the expiry of one year and one month from the date of her marriage. The death of the deceased is highly unnatural. The applicant is a charge-sheeted accused under Section 304B. As such, presumption is available to the prosecution. However, the applicant has not been able to discharge the burden, which is required to be discharged in respect of an offence under Section 304B IPC. It is thus vehemently urged that the bail application of the present applicant is liable to be rejected.
Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State, but in view of the facts as noted herein above and also upon perusal of the material brought on record, I do not find any good reason to grant indulgence to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands rejected.
However, the trial court is expected to gear up the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial, if there is no other legal impediment.
Office is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the court concerned within a fortnight.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 Ravi Kant