Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48494 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanjay Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ram Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Sanjay Gupta, seeking his enlargement on bail in S.T No. 126 of 2018 (State Vs. Sanjay Gupta) arising out of Case Crime No. 4 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Raipurwa, District Kanpur during the pendency of the trial which is now said to be pending in the Court of IInd Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with Geetanjali on 22.11.2011. From the aforesaid wedlock, a child namely Sonu Gupta was born, who is said to be five years on date. Admittedly, the son born from the aforesaid wedlock is minor. After the expiry of a period of six years and one month from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 8.1.2018, in which the wife of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 8.1.2018 not on the information of the applicant or any of his family members but on the information given by father of the deceased namely, Kamal Chandra. In the opinion of the panch witnesses, the death of the deceased was characterized as suicidal. The F.I.R. in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 8.1.2018 by Kamal Chandra Gupta the father of the deceased, which was registered as Case Crime No. 4 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Raipurwa, District Kanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., three persons namely, Sanjay Gupta (husband), Subhas (Devar), Ram Prakash (father- in-law) of the deceased were nominated as the named accused. The Post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 8.1.2018. 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. Except for the ligature mark, no other external ante-mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. Upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C, the Police submitted a charge-sheet dated 5.3.2018 against all the named accused. Upon submission of the charge sheet dated 5.3.2018, cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 15.3.2018. Thereafter the case was committed to the Court of sessions vide committal order dated 28.8.2018. As a result, S.T No. 126 of 2018 (State Vs. Sanjay Gupta) came to be registered, which is now said to be pending in the Court of Additional District Judge IInd, Kanpur Nagar. On date, two prosecution witnesses of fact namely P.W.1 and P.W. 2 have been examined.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. However, the applicant is innocent. He is in jail since 8.1.2018 and as such, he has undergone more than 11 months of incarceration. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. The deceased was a short tempered lady and has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. Absence of any external ante-mortem injury on the body of the deceased speaks of the bonafide of the applicant. From the wedlock of the applicant and the deceased, a son namely Sonu Gupta was born who is aged about five years. On the aforesaid factual Premise, it is urged that looking into precarious family conditions of the applicant, it is impossible to suggest that the present applicant shall abet in the commission of the alleged crime. General and omnibus allegations have been made in the F.I.R. regarding the demand of dowry and commission of cruelty upon the deceased for the non fulfilment of dowry. It is lastly, urged that the applicant was not well and she was undergoing treatment which is established from the documents, photo copy of which are on the record at page 32 to 45 of the paper book. It is thus submitted that the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that deceased was a young lady aged about 24 years. The deceased had died at her matrimonial home. Just after six years and one month of her marriage, a children was born who is said to be aged about five years. As such, the death of the deceased at her matrimonial home immediately, after expiry of period of six years, cannot be said to be natural. The applicant is a charge sheeted accused under section 304 B IPC also. As such presumption is available to the prosecution. The present applicant has failed to discharge the burden arising out of an offence under section 304 B IPC up to this stage. It is thus urged that no case for grant of bail is made out and the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the material brought on the record and the complicity of the applicants but without making any comments on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused applicant. Thus, the bail application of the present applicants 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 :- 21.12.2018 Arshad