Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40060 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanjeev Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Madan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today is taken on record.
3. This application for bail has been filed by the applicant- Sanjeev seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.149 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Bhojpur, District-Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial.
4. Perused the record.
5. From the record, it appears that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with Sadbhawna @ Sankhya on 09.05.2017 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Customs. However, after the expiry of a period of more than ten months from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 30.03.2018, in which the wife of the applicant consumed some poisonous substances. The first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 30.09.2017 by Shiv Kumar, the father of the deceased, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0149 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Bhojpur, District- Moradabad.
6. In the aforesaid F.I.R., five persons, namely, Sanjeev- husband, Daulat Singh-father-in-law, Usha Devi-mother-in-law, Gangaram-grand-father-in-law and Ballu-cousin-father-in-law of deceased were nominated as the named accused. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 30.03.2018 on the information given by the first informant. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the cause of death of the deceased was characterised as homicidal. A perusal of the F.I.R. will further go to show that allegations with regard to demand of dowry and the commission of cruelty upon the deceased for non-fulfilment of the demand of dowry have specifically been levelled. The post-mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 30.03.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased, opined that the cause of the death of the deceased could not be ascertained. Accordingly, viscera of the deceased was preserved. However, the Doctor further noticed that there were no external ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased. The Police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. has submitted a charge-sheet dated 30.06.2018 only against three of the named accused, namely, Sanjeev-husband, Daulat Singh-father-in-law, Usha Devi- mother-in-law of the deceased. However, two named accused, namely, Gangaram-grand-father-in-law and Ballu-cousin-father- in-law of the deceased were excluded. Upon submission of the aforesaid charge-sheet dated 30.06.2018, cognizance was taken by the court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 03.01.2018. What has happened subsequent to the passing of the Cognizance Taking Order dated 03.01.2018 has neither been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the present bail application nor the same has been disclosed at the time of hearing of the present bail application by the learned counsel for the applicant. The Chief Chemical Analyst concerned has submitted the viscera report dated 19.06.2018 in which it is stated that Organo-Phosphorus Insecticide was found in the samples of the body of the deceased.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he is innocent. The applicant is in Jail since 30.03.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is then submitted that the deceased was a short tempered lady and has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by consuming organo phosphorus insecticide. The absence of any external ante-mortem injury on the body of the deceased clearly speaks of the bonafide of the present applicant. On the basis of the documents appended alongwith the bail application, pbotocopies of which are on the record as Annexure 8 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application as well as Annexure 2 to the supplementary affidavit, it is urged that the deceased was suffering from epilepsy as well as mental depression. As such, the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
8. Per contra, the learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The applicant is not only a named accused but also a charge- sheeted accused. He next submits that the plea urged by the learned counsel for the applicant having not been substantiated of any document. Therefore, no case for bail arises. The Court finds that the nature of death of the deceased wipes out the possibility of death of the deceased on account of epilepsy attack. The medical evidence appended alongwith the bail application as well as the supplementary affidavit does not go to establish that the deceased was suffering from Psychotic disorder. Consequently, the submissions urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that since the deceased was suffering from the mental depression and in that state of mind, she committed suicide is not substantiated by the documentary evidence.
9. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the material brought on record and the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I do not find any good ground to allow the present application. Consequently, the bail application of the applicant is hereby rejected.
10. However, at this stage, it is expected from the learned trial court to gear up the trial and make necessary endeavour to conclude the same within one year provided the applicant would render all necessary co-operation in early conclusion of the trial.
11. Office is directed to communicate the copy of this order forthwith to concerned court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 YK