Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19368 of 2018 Applicant :- Neeraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Mishra,Birendra Prasad Maurya,M.P. Srivastava,Manoj Kumar Kushwahah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant and counter affidavit filed by the State. Taken on record.
2. Heard Sri M.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Also, a certified copy of the ordersheet of the trial proceedings has been placed on record by learned counsel for the applicant. The same has been marked 'X' and kept on record.
3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Neeraj with a prayer to release him on bail in Complaint Case No. 629 of 2017 under Sections 498-A, 304- B IPC and Section 4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Pooranpur, District - Pilibhit during pendency of trial.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of dowry death, punishable with imprisonment upto life;
(ii) against the complaint lodged on 10.02.2011 arising from application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 10.02.2011 making vague and general allegations against the entire family of the present applicant, the applicant has been in confinement since 18.09.2017. In that regard, it has been submitted that the applicant has not avoided the process and surrendered before the court upon cognizance being taken;
(iii) the applicant has no criminal history;
5. On prima facie basis, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the marriage between the parties was three years' old and there was no earlier report or complaint of any cruelty or demand of dowry etc. In such circumstances, accidental occurrence had taken place, wherein the deceased suffered severe burn injuries to which she succumbed on 18.02.2011. At present, it has been submitted that trial is being delayed as the prosecution witnesses are not appearing whereas the applicant has remained confined for more than two years.
6. Opposing the bail application, learned AGA would submit that, at present, besides the complaint allegation, there is a dying declaration of the deceased clearly implicating, amongst others, the present applicant who is her husband. Thus, it has been submitted that there is no inconsistency in the prosecution case as may entitle for favourable consideration of the bail application of the applicant.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in the first place, the marriage between the parties was only three years' old and, at present, it appears that the deceased had made specific allegation, amongst others, against the present applicant, who is her husband. As such, the applicant is not found to be entitled to bail at this stage.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
9. However, perusal of the ordersheet does indicate that trial is being unduly delayed. Therefore, a direction is issued to the trial court to ensure speedy conclusion of the trial, without granting any undue or long adjournments. Also, the trial court may remain cognisant of its powers to take coercive measures for ensuring attendance of the prosecution witnesses so that the trial may not be delayed any further and be completed within a period of one year from today.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 AHA