Heard Sri Dilip Gupta, Sri Rajiv Gupta, Sri Rajrshi Gupta, Sri Preet Pal Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Sachin alias Sanju with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 969 of 2009, under sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Budaun.
The facts, in brief, of this case are that the FIR of this case has been lodged by Sobaran Singh on 25.4.2009 at 9.30 a.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 22.4.2009 at 2.00 p.m. It is alleged that the marriage of the deceased Smt. Shila was solemnized in the month of May 2006 with the applicant. The in-laws of the deceased were not satisfied with the gifts etc. given in the marriage, they were harassing the deceased, they were demanding a car and money. On 22.4.2009 at about 2.00 p.m. Ramendra Singh brother in law of the applicant gave a telephonic message to the first informant that the deceased was admitted in district hospital Budaun, on that information, the first informant along with his family members came to the district hospital Budaun and saw the dead body of the deceased lying in the mortuary, the inquest report was prepared on the basis of the information given by Ward boy on 22.4.2009. According to the post mortem examination report, no external mark of injury was found on the dead body, the cause of death could not be ascertained, hence the viscera was preserved.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the allegation with regard to the demand of car and some money is absolutely false and base less, the deceased had died due to blood vomiting, she was taken to the hospital by the applicant, its information was given to the first informant, in their presence the inquest report was prepared, the first informant Sobaran Singh is the witness of the inquest report. At that time he did not make any objection but after 3 days, the FIR of this case has been lodged due to ulterior motive. The applicant is a 2 young boy, he is minor, his date of birth is 25.8.1989 and there is no allegation that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before his death, the viscera report has not been received. He was not having criminal antecedent, he may be released on bail.
In reply of above contention it is submitted by learned A.G.A. that the applicant is the husband of the deceased, the deceased had died within three years of her marriage, the death of deceased was unnatural, the allegation against the applicant for which he was subjected to cruelty, the applicant is a major person, being husband , he is the main accused, he may not be released on bail.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and from the perusal of the record, it appears that from the FIR the marriage of the deceased was solemnized in May 2006 with the applicant, the deceased has died on 22.4.2009, the death has occurred within 3 years of her marriage, the allegation of demand of dowry is raised, for which the deceased was subjected to cruelty, according to the post mortem examination report, the death of the deceased could not be ascertained hence viscera was preserved, no viscera report has been received, the applicant,being the husband of the deceased, is not entitled for bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail at this stage.
Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
Dated : January 27 , 2010.
SU