Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13560 of 2019 Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Bhartiya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Janardan Singh,Chandra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Shri Chandra Kumar, learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and perused the record.
This is second bail application after rejection of first bail application on merits vide detailed order dated 13.6.2018 at A1.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that after rejection of his first bail application on 13.6.2018, the applicant is suffering from psychiatric problems as per report of doctor filed at SA-1 with supplementary affidavit dated 19.4.2019; that even since before above report, the applicant was under treatment as per copies of prescriptions filed at SA-1 to supplementary affidavit dated 5.2.2019; that in para 19 to the affidavit given in support of bail application, it has been contended that applicant is suffering from problem of epilepsy since childhood; that applicant has also moved application under Section 329 Cr.P.C. before trial Court; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 1.5.2017; that in the circumstances, the applicant may be released on bail;
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that this is a case of brutal murder of wife by husband after reunion of marriage by strangulating her with electric wire; that the allegations about psychiatric problems of applicant are absolutely false and incorrect and even the report of doctor at SA-1 to supplementary affidavit dated 19.3.2019 states that "patient can be managed in jail for his psychiatric symptoms as they are of very subtle nature"; that the above symptoms appear to be self created and dramatic in nature; that if the applicant is released on bail shall misuse the liberty of bail and abscond the delay and defraud the time.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail. The 2nd bail application of applicant Virendra Kumar Bhartiya in S.T. No.656 of 2017, Case Crime No.342 of 2017, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Naini, District Prayagraj is rejected accordingly.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 Anil K. Sharma