Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39424 of 2018 Applicant :- Ram Gopal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Indra Pal Singh Rajpoot, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Ram Gopal, seeking his enlargement on bail in S.T. No. 8 of 2018 (State of U.P. Vs. Ramgopal and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 309 of 2017 under Sections 306 IPC, P.S. Ajnar, District Mahoba during the pendency of the trial.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the applicant namely Ram Gopal was solemnized with Seema on 26.5.2004 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. From the aforesaid wedlock, a daughter was born who is said to be aged about 11 years. After the expiry of period of 13 years from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 12.10.2017, in which the wife of the applicant died. The panchayatnama of the deceased was conducted on 12.10.2017 on the information given by the brother of the applicant. Post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 13.10.2017. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia as a result of anti mortem hanging. The Doctor however noted in the post mortem report that four injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Apart from the injury no.1, which is ligature mark, three contusions were found on the body of the deceased on the scalp. The F.I.R. regarding the aforesaid occurrence was lodged on 4.11.2017 i.e. after 22 days of the occurrence by the father of the deceased. The said F.I.R. came to be registered as Case Crime No. 0309 of 2017, under Sections 147, 302, 498A, 120B IPC, P.S. Ajnar, District Mahoba. In the aforesaid F.I.R., six persons namely Ram Gopal (husband), Siya Ram (father-in-law), Paramsukh (Jeth), Jawahar (Jeth), Sudarshan and Rajkumar (relatives) were nominated as accused persons. Upon competition of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number, the Police submitted a charge-sheet dated 22.12.2017 only against the husband i.e. the applicant herein under section 306 IPC. Upon submission of the aforesaid charge sheet cognizance was taken by the Court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 15.1.2018. As a result of the aforesaid, S.T. No. 8 of 2018 (State of U.P. Vs. Ramgopal and Others) under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Ajnar, District Mahoba came to be registered. On date the statement-in-chief of the P.W.1, the first informant, has already been recorded. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The incident has occurred after 13 years of marriage, therefore, no charge sheet was submitted against the applicant under Section 498-A, IPC. The applicant is innocent. He is having no criminal antecedent to his credit except the present one. The applicant is in jail since 7.11.2017. The proof of charge under Section 306 IPC is subject to trial evidence. Up to this stage, there is no evidence on record to show that the applicant has aided, conspired or instigated in the commission of crime. Attention of the Court was also invited to the fact that from the wedlock of the applicant, the deceased has a daughter who is aged about 11 years and in the light of the aforesaid fact, it is vehemently urged that the applicant has abetted in the commission of crime. On the aforesaid, it is urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He has pointed out that though in the F.I.R. six persons were nominated as the accused, the Police has submitted charge-sheet only against the present applicant. The trial has already commenced and P.W.1 who is the father of the deceased has already been examined. Attention of the Court is further invited to the post mortem report of the deceased, copy of which is on the record at page 32 onwards of the paper book. Referring to the injuries recorded by the Doctor who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased, it is submitted that three contusions injuries came on the scalp on the body of the deceased which are anti-mortem injuries, which remains unexplained. A parallel was drawn by placing the post mortem report, statement of the witness namely first informant, which is at page 21 of the paper book, to substantiate the facts that why on the body of the deceased external injuries were found, which were anti mortem in nature. The statement of first informant who was present at the place of occurrence after he got the information of the death of his daughter i.e. deceased clearly records that none of the family members of the applicant were present at the place of occurrence. On the cumulative strength of the aforesaid, it is strenuously urged that the attending circumstances of the present case being unexplained by the applicant, who is no one else but the husband of the deceased, no case for bail is made out and the same is liable to be rejected.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the evidence brought on record as well as the complicity of the applicant, I do not find any good reason to grant indulgence to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant stands rejected.
However, the trial court is expected to gear up the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial, if there is no other legal impediment.
Office is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the court concerned within a fortnight.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Arshad