Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37625 of 2017 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tiwari,Ramesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
This is the second bail application on behalf of applicant. First bail application was rejected by Hon'ble Pratyush Kumar,J. vide order dated 28.7.2017 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14534 of 2017.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
According to the prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant alleging that the marriage of deceased Priyanka Sharma was solemnized with Vijay Kumar Srivastava before four years. On 4.12.2016, he killed Priyanka Sharma.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is the husband of deceased. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present. There is no independent witness against the applicant. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 8.12.2016 (near about two years and three months) having no criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant has place reliance upon the decisions of Hon'bel Apex Court rendered in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, 2018 LawSuit(SC)84 and the decision rendered in the case of Emperor Vs. Hlhutchinson, 1931 LawSuit(All)15, as well as the decision rendered in the case of Nagendra Nath Chakrabarthi, 1923 LawSuit(Cal)526, in support of his submissions.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is the husband of deceased and killed his wife within seven years of marriage. Hence, he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail, inasmuch as, the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant are not applicable in fact and circumstances of the present case. Further all the points raised by the learned counsel for the applicant has already been urged and decided by this Court while disposing of the first bail application. No fresh good ground has been made out in second bail application, hence, this bail application of applicant Vijay Kumar Srivastava involved in Case Crime No. 754 of 2016, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Shahpur, District Gorakhpur is hereby rejected.
It is directed to the court concerned to decide the case expeditiously according to Section 309 Cr.P.C.
A copy of this order be transmitted to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 Iss/