Sher Singh vs State Of U.P.
2019 Latest Caselaw 6225 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 74
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24823 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Sher Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Sanjeev Kumar
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of this bail application.

The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.69 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and under Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Sikandarpur Vaish, District Kasganj.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in this case admittedly marriage took place in the year 2015 and there was no demand of dowry raised by the applicant. No specific allegation was ever made upto this stage against the applicant and the applicant has been roped in, in this case merely because he is the husband of the deceased. Infact after the marriage took place a girl aged about 3 years was born to the deceased out of the wedlock.The deceased herself insisted for going to her parental home and on refusal, she herself consumed poison. The applicant had no motive for compelling the deceased to take poison. Applicant has no criminal history. He is a law abiding citizen and in case, applicant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of absconding or misusing the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that in this case the applicant is the husband. There is presumption running against the applicant under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and as per the allegations made against the applicant every ingredient of Section 304B IPC is complete because marriage took place in the year 2015. This by itself is confirmative that marriage is within 7 years. Death itself is unnatural, in view of the poison detected in the viscera report. This viscera report by itself is indicative of fact that cruelty has been perpetrated on the deceased as she was poisoned to death and the allegations in the FIR is itself reflective of fact that the demand of dowry was raised, therefore, the legal presumption still stands against the applicant as he is the husband and custodian of the deceased.

After hearing the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant, the reply by the learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. and upon perusal of the various documents annexed with the present bail application and also looking to the allegations made in the FIR, and considering the gravity of the offence, no good ground is made out for bail.

Accordingly, this bail application is rejected at this stage.

The observation so made in the body of this order shall not prejudice proceeding of the trial court while deciding the case on merit.

Order Date :- 9.7.2019

Raj