Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42278 of 2018 Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahabir Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Mahabir Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant and the affidavit of compliance filed by the learned .A.G.A. today in Court are taken on record.
3. This application for bail has been filed by the applicant- Suresh Kumar for seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 516 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S.-Chandpur, District-Bijnor, during the pendency of the trial.
4. Perused the record.
5. It transpires from the record that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with Roma Devi on 21.11.2012 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Customs. It may be noted here that the marriage of the applicant with Roma Devi is the second marriage as the applicant had lost his wife and Roma Devi had lost her husband. From the first wedlock of the husband, a daughter was born whereas from the second wedlock of the wife of the applicant, namely, Roma Devi, who is now the deceased, a son was born. However, after the expiry of a period of five years and seven months from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 08.07.2018, in which the wife of the applicant consumed some poisonous substance. It is the case of the present applicant that after coming to know of the aforesaid occurrence, immediately the applicant took the victim to District Hospital, Kanpur where she was admitted on 08.07.2018. Thereafter, the victim was transferred to TMU Hospital, Moradabad. The victim was discharged from the aforesaid Hospital on 12.07.2018 as she required further treatment at Multi Speciality Hospital. Consequently, the victim was being taken to AIIMS New Delhi. On the way, the family members of the victim intervened and got the victim admitted at Beena Hospital, Bijnor. Ultimately, the victim succumbed to the poisonous substance consumed by her at the aforesaid hospital on 12.07.2018. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 13.07.2018 on the information given by Sandeep Kumar, the brother of the deceased. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the cause of death of the deceased was characterised as homicidal. The post-mortem of the body of deceased was conducted on the same day, i.e., on 13.07.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that no definite cause can be assigned regarding the death of the deceased. Accordingly, viscera of the deceased was directed to be preserved. The first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 13.07.2018, by the brother of the deceased, namely, Sandeep Kumar, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0516 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.
P. Act, P.S.-Chandpur District-Bijnor.
6. In the aforesaid F.I.R., the present applicant, namely, Suresh Kumar, was nominated as solitary accused. 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 20.09.2018 upon which cognisance has been taken vide cognizance taking order dated 15.10.2018. The Chief Chemical Analyst concerned has submitted the viscera report dated 27.10.2018 in which it has been stated that a foreign chemical compound, namely, Aluminium Phosphide was found in the samples of the body of the deceased. What has happened subsequent to the passing of the cognizance taking order dated 15.10.2018 has not been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the present bail application nor the same has been disclosed by the learned counsel for the applicant at the time of hearing of the present bail application.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he is innocent. The applicant is in Jail since 17.05.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that the deceased was a short tempered lady and has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by consuming Aluminium Phosphide as is evident from the viscera report of the deceased. The bonafide of the applicant is explicit from the fact that no external ante mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. Immediately after the occurrence took place, the victim was taken by the applicant himself to the District Hospital, Kanpur. Thereafter, the victim was transferred to EMU Hospital, Moradabad. Simply, general and omnibus allegations have been made in the F.I.R. regarding demand of dowry. In the aforesaid precarious family condition of the applicant inasmuch as the marriage of the applicant with the deceased is the second marriage and from the first wedlock of the applicant, a daughter was born coupled with fact that a son from the second wedlock was born, are the indicators to show that the applicant will not even abet in the commission of the alleged crime. On the aforesaid premise it is thus urged that the present applicant, though he is the husband of the deceased, is liable to be enlarged on bail.
8. Per contra, the learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the occurrence has taken place within seven years of marriage of the applicant. The applicant is not only a named accused but also a charge-sheeted accused under Section 498A, 304B and Sections 3/4 D. P. Act inasmuch there is no explanation as to why the deceased had committed suicide by consuming Aluminium Phosphide. For all the aforesaid reasons, it is urged that the present applicant does not deserve any sympathy of this Court and the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
9. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon consideration of the evidence on record as well as the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, 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 application 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 applicants 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 :- 18.12.2018 YK