Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31672 of 2018 Applicant :- Pankaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Pankaj with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. - 1040 of 2017, under Sections - 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Baar, District - Lalitpur, during pendency of trial.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of dowry death caused by burning, punishable with imprisonment upto life;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 28.11.2017, the applicant is in confinement since 29.11.2017;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest;
(iv) the applicant has no criminal history;
(v) chargesheet has already been submitted, trial has commenced. However, there is no hope for early conclusion of trial;
(vi) on prima facie basis, only it may be noted, according to the applicant while specific allegations have been made in the FIR and during investigation of the applicant having set a blaze the deceased after pouring kerosene oil on her, at the trial, Chetram (PW- 1) who is the father of the deceased and Rammu Lal who is the independent witness have turned hostile and denied in entirety, the allegation of demand of dowry. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the applicant, there is no evidence of dowry death and the applicant is entitled to bail, at this stage itself specifically since the applicant is in confinement since 29.11.2017.
4. Opposing the aforesaid submission, learned AGA would submit that at present, no conclusion of fact may be drawn and no case for bail be made out as three other witness of fact remain to be examined including the mother of the deceased. Release of the applicant on bail may prejudice the fair outcome of the trial as three witness of fact remain to be examined.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in view of the nature of allegation made against the applicant and his special relationship with the deceased being her husband, the prayer for bail is declined, at this stage. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected.
6. However, considering the fact that the applicant had not avoided arrest, pursuant to the FIR lodged on 28.11.2017 and has remained confined since then, his liberty cannot be curtailed for an indefinite period of time.
7. Accordingly, it is expected that the learned court below shall make all efforts to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from today, keeping in mind the principle contained in Section 309 Cr.P.C.
8. In any case, if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, then subject to the applicant cooperating at the trial and not seeking adjournment, the applicant shall be at liberty to file a fresh bail application at that stage.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Abhilash