Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9952 of 2017 Applicant :- Vikas @ Vikky Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Narayan Rai,Amar Singh Yadav,Niraj Kumar Baranwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of Vikas @ Vikky in connection with Case Crime No. 180 of 2016 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Phoolpur, District Azamgarh.
Heard Sri Anurag Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Niraj Kumar Baranwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Saqib Meezan, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present crime; that the deceased had gone back home and stayed for one and a half month whereafter the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself to death in a room locked from within that was broken into in the presence of the deceased's parents, the Naib Tehsildar and the Police; that in such a short period of marriage there can be no background of a dowry demand or cruelty; and, that the applicant is a respectable man with no criminal history who is in jail as since 24.06.2016, a period of a year and three quarters an under trial.
Learned AGA has, on the other hand, 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. He further submits that this is a second bail application and no fresh ground or material is available at this stage to grant the indulgence of bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant in a limited rejoinder has said that the trial court has not framed charges as yet, while the applicant is suffering incarnation pending trial who is a young man of 20-21 years.
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.
Anything said in this order will not prejudice the case of either of the parties at the trial and the trial court will be absolutely free to draw its own conclusion from evidence as it appears in those proceedings.
Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected at this stage.
Looking to the period of incarnation, it is directed that the trial court will frame charges subject to the right of the applicant and the other accused to seek discharge within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, whereafter the trial court will proceed with and conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of committal in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle laid down in the recent judgment of the 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 strict coercive measure for ensuring their presence. Once, the witnesses appear, they will not be discharged until their evidence is recorded.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 27.3.2018 Deepak