Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.122 of 2019, under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mall, District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased on 05.03.2017 and they were enjoying their matrimonial life and the deceased was never victimized by the applicant and his family members, and no any demand of dowry was ever raised from her. He also submitted that the deceased was suffering from some abdominal pain and the applicant brought the deceased to Sadatganj Hospital with the consent of mother and brother of the deceased and later on, she was admitted to Adarsh Hospital, from where she was discharged after proper treatment. Thereafter, the deceased again fell ill on 27.03.2019 and she was brought to Lari Cardiology Centre, Lucknow where she was declared dead.
Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Hira Lal and others vs. State (Govt. of NCT, Delhi) reported in 2003 8 SCC 80, Baijnath and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2017 1 SCC 101 and State of A.P. vs. Raj Gopal Asawa and another reported in 2004 8 SCC 470 and submitted that there must be material to show that the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment on the basis of demand of dowry in the death concerned and in the present case, cause of death is not ascertained and it is a case of natural death, therefore, the provisions of Section 304-B I.P.C. will not attract in the present case. He also submitted that the applicant is in jail since 16.04.2019, but till today case has not been committed and except the present case, the applicant does not have any criminal antecedent. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of bail of the applicant and submitted that the case laws relied by learned counsel for the applicant are not applicable in the present case, and he further submitted that postmortem report reveals that six ante mortem injuries are found on the body of the deceased and in the statement of witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer, it is found that the deceased was being victimized for demand of dowry and she died within 7 years of her marriage, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the F.I.R. as well as the postmortem report of the deceased and the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of Hira Lal and others vs. State (Govt. of NCT, Delhi) (supra), Baijnath and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (supra) and State of A.P. vs. Raj Gopal Asawa and another (supra) relied by learned counsel for the applicant, it is evident that the deceased died within 7 years of her marriage and the postmortem report reveals that six antemortem injuries are found on the body of the decased which are as under:-
1. Abraded contusion 6 cm x 4 cm present on posterolateral aspect of Rt. side of neck 2 cm above Rt. clavicle.
2. Contusion 8 cm x 7 cm present on Rt. side of neck just above the Rt. clavicle.
3. Contusion 3 cm x 2 cm present on Rt. side back of head 4 cm above & behind the Rt. ear.
4. Contusion 4 cm x 3 cm present on Lt. side back of head 3 cm above & behind the Lt. ear.
5. Contusion 3 cm x 2 cm present on thigh of Lt. buttock.
6. An Abrasion 8 cm x 6 cm present on front of Lt. thigh 18 cm above knee joint.
It is also evident that the statement of witnesses also corroborate with the ante mortem injuries in relation to victimization of the deceased, therefore, the judgments relied by learned counsel for the applicant are not applicable in the present case, and no case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected.
Trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, if possible, within one year from the date of production of computerized copy of this order.
The Commissioner of Police, Lucknow as well as the Joint Director of Prosecution, Lucknow are directed to ensure the presence of witnesses as well as accused persons before the trial court.
Office is directed to communicate this order to District & Sessions Judge, Lucknow as well as the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow and the Joint Director of Prosecution, Lucknow for its necessary compliance forthwith.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and the computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 19.8.2021 S. Shivhare