Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20261 of 2018 Applicant :- Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri C.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is the husband of deceased. P.W.1 to P.W.6 have been examined, they have not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 27.12.2016 (near about one and half year) having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that according to dying declaration of deceased (annexed at page no. 24), main role of poured kerosene oil and set her on fire was assigned to the applicant.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application of applicant Raju involved in Case Crime No. 1026 of 2016, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Chhibramau, District Kannauj is hereby rejected.
Trial court is directed to decide this case according to Section 309 Cr.P.C., expeditiously.
A copy of this order be transmitted to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 A. Singh