Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38149 of 2019 Applicant :- Nirmala Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, over this Anticipatory Bail Application, moved under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, with a prayer for grant of anticipatory, in Case Crime No. 48 of 2019, under Sections 328, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bahariyabad, District Ghazipur, by the applicants, Nirmala and Prem Lata, as well as learned AGA, representing State of U.P. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it was applicants, who got the informant admitted at Hospital for her treatment wherein she has consumed Sindur and it was falsely reported at the Police Station, by registering a false case against the applicants whereas informant was pregnant and was intended to be at her parental house, but was forbidden by the applicants, resulting in this occurrence. It is a case of false implication, hence anticipatory bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed prayer for anticipatory bail with this contention that as per the statements recorded, under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., it was a case of administration of poisonous substance, under threat and pressure, with an intention to kill the informant and there was recovery of Sindur, a poisonous substances, from her Gastric Livage, there was persistent demand of dowry and cruelty with regard to it. There is every likelihood of tampering with evidence and fleeing from course of justice, in case of grant of anticipatory bail.
Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through the first information report as well as bail rejection order of learned Sessions Judge, Ghazipur, it is apparent that the marriage is of 21.4.2019 whereas this occurrence took place on 29.6.2019, i.e., within two months of marriage. Intake of poisonous substance is not disputed. Persistent complaint of cruelty, with regard to demand of dowry is also there.
Under all above facts and circumstances, offence is very heinous, requiring no indulgence by way of grant anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands rejected.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 bgs/