Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7420 of 2018 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. C.P. Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail filed on behalf of Rahul in Case Crime No.54 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Dadri, District Gautam Budha Nagar.
Heard Dr. C.P. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav alongwith Sri Vivek Dubey, learned AGA on behalf of the State.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is he is the husband and on that account alone he has been falsely implicated in the instant crime; that it is a case according to Sri Upadhyay where the applicant accidentally took poison, a fact she is said to have told the doctor who treated her and the same finds record in C.D. Parcha No.III dated 25.01.2017; that the fact has further been recorded in Parcha No.XII dated 01.04.2017 where the Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of both doctors who treated the deceased Preeti; that there was no demand of dowry or cruelty in connection with dowry preceding the occurrence so as to attract the provisions of Section 304B IPC; that the statement of doctors clearly reveal that she was brought to the hospital by her husband-the present applicant; that all witnesses of fact PW-1 Satyendra (first informant), PW-2 Bhule Ram (father of the deceased), PW-3 Smt. Prakashwati (mother of the deceased) and PW-4 Ankit (younger brother of the deceased) had all been examined; that no witnesses of fact remains to be examined and also the fact particularly that the prosecution witnesses aforesaid-all of them have not supported the prosecution case entitling him to be released on bail; and, that the applicant who is a respectable man with no criminal history is in jail since 24.01.2017.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail plea with the submission that it is case of an unnatural death of a wife in her matrimonial home within seven years of marriage with a background of dowry demand. It is further submitted by the learned AGA that the applicant is the husband who bears the highest order of responsibility in a case of the present nature; also, it is emphasized by the learned AGA that so far as the evidence recorded during trial is concerned, the same is a matter to be appreciated at the trial and cannot be made basis for relief at this stage particularly when other witnesses who may be formal still remain to be examined.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, 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.
The bail application, accordingly, stands rejected at this stage.
Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that at this point that all witnesses of fact having been examined, the continue detention of the applicant as an undertrial merely because formal witnesses are yet to be examined prejudice his right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
It is, accordingly, directed that S.T. No.201 of 2017 (State V. Rahul), under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Dadri, District Gautam Budha Nagar shall be positively concluded within a period of three months next from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order which shall be certified to the trial court by the office forthwith.
It is further directed that in case witnesses do not appear on service of summons, immediate coercive measures shall be adopted by the trial court to secure the attendance and once a witness appears, he will not be discharged till evidence is concluded.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Shahroz