Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8069 of 2018 Applicant :- Pintu Urf Sandeep Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of Pintu @ Sandeep Singh in connection with Case Crime No. 285 of 2017 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat.
Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.A.S. Abidi, learned AGA along with Sri Vivek Dubey, learned counsel on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is the husband; that he has been falsely implicated in the present case on the account of the fact alone that he is the husband; that there was an issue between the husband and the wife over the wife's demand to live with her husband at his station of work who is a labourer and the wife lives conveniently at the parties native village but the wife wanted to live with her husband which husband could not afford; that the aforesaid dispute escalated on the fateful day and drove the deceased to commit suicide by consuming some poisonous susbstance whereafter she was rushed to hospital by the husband as asserted in paragraph no. 4 of the affidavit; that she was referred to a higher centre but could not be saved and the applicant has been implicated in the crime by the in-laws lodging an opportunistic FIR; and, that the applicant is a respectable man with no criminal history who is in jail since 18.08.2017.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail plea with the submission that it is a case of an unnatural death of a wife within seven years of marriage in the four walls of her matrimonial home with a background of dowry demand. In addition, he submits that the applicant is the husband, and, therefore bears the highest order of responsibility.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, the relationship of the applicant to the deceased who is the husband but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for bail at this stage.
Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected at this stage.
It is pointed out that the case has not yet been committed to the court of Sessions. The case will be committed to the court of Sessions within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the Magistrate concerned. The learned Sessions Judge will endeavour to proceed with the trial expeditiously and conclude the same within a period of six months next after committal of the case to the court of Sessions in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate necessary coercive measure for ensuring their presence.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 Deepak