Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40702 of 2018 Applicant :- Tulsiram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bashisth Narain Pandey
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Bashishth Narain Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant- Tulsiram seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 125 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Munderwa, District- Basti, during the pendency of the trial.
It transpires from the record that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with Anita on 10.02.2012 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Customs. Just after the expiry of a period of 4 years and two months from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 15.04.2018, in which the wife of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged by Raj Kumar, the brother of the deceased on 15.4.2018, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0570 of 2017 125 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Munderwa, District-Basti. In the aforesaid F.I.R., five persons, namely, Tulsi Ram (the husband), Agya Ram, (the father-in-law), Mother of Rulsi Ram i.e grand mother-in-law and sister of Rulsi Ram (nand) of the deceased were nominated as the named accused. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 15.04.2018 on the information of the first informant. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the death of the deceased was characterized as suicidal. The post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on the next day i.e. on 16.4.2018. The cause of death of the deceased was said to be asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. However, no external ante-mortem injury was found 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 12.7.2018 only against two of the named accused i.e. the mother-in-law and the husband of the deceased i.e. the applicant herein. Rest of the named accused have been excluded.
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 28.04.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. The absence of any ante mortem external injury on the body of the deceased speaks of the bona fide of the present applicant. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. The absence of initiation of any criminal proceedings from 10.2.2014 up to 15.4.2014 in respect of harassment of the deceased for demand of dowry is ample proof of the fact that neither demand of dowry was made nor any cruelty was committed upon the deceased for non fulfilment of alleged demand of dowry. On the aforesaid factual premise, he submits that no offence under section 304 B I.P.C. can be said to have been committed by the present applicant. As such allegations to the contrary made in the F.I.R. have been levelled only to give colour to the F.I.R. and falsely implicate the present applicant. He thus submits that the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned AGA and the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that the deceased was a young lady aged about 25 years and she has died at her matrimonial home just after 4 years and 2 months from the date of her marriage. The death of the deceased is highly unnatural. The applicant is a charge sheeted accused under section 304 B I.P.C. As such, presumption is available to the prosecution. The applicant is under burden to explain the manner of occurrence as well as the cause of occurrence in terms of section 106 and 113 of the Indian Evidence Act, which burden remains undischarged by the applicant upto this stage. It is thus submitted that the applicant does not deserve any sympathy of this Court. The bail application is liable to be rejected.
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.
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.
Office is directed to communicate the copy of this order forthwith to concerned court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 HSM