Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45643 of 2017 Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Rajpoot Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahadeo Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of Shiv Kumar Rajpoot in connection with Case Crime No. 191 of 2017 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali City, District Banda.
Heard Sri Mahadeo Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Saqib Meezan, learned AGA on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been implicated in the instant crime falsely only on the account of the fact that he is the husband; that there was no demand of dowry or cruelty in connection with dowry demand immediately preceding the occurrence so as to attract the provisions of Section 304B IPC; that the deceased was keeping unwell for a long time that led her to commit suicide by hanging herself to death which is absolutely unabetted; that the death is suicidal, not homicidal that is clearly proven by the post-mortem report where the cause of death is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging; that in the ongoing trial being S.T. No. 135 of 2017 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Banda the evidence of witnesses of fact has already been recorded which in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant is exculpatory; and, that the applicant is a respectable man with no criminal history who is in jail since 16.04.2017.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail plea with the submission that it is a case of an unnatural death of a wife within seven years of marriage in the four walls of her matrimonial home with a background of dowry demand. In addition, it has been submitted that the outcome of the trial cannot be preempted by considering the evidence of two witnesses of fact recorded. The applicant is the husband who bears the highest order of responsibility in the matter.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, the relationship of the applicant to the deceased who is the husband but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for bail at this stage.
Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected at this stage.
Looking to the statement of learned counsel for the applicant that only two witnesses of fact have remained to be examined, the trial court is directed to expedite proceedings and conclude the trial within three months next positively from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate necessary coercive measure for ensuring their presence.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Deepak