Raj Kumar vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 7214 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 81
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8497 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Raj Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjive Kumar Gupta
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rishikesh Kumar Maurya
 

 
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rishikesh Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 93 of 2020, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Kadar Chowk, District Budaun with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case being husband of the deceased Savitri. It is further submitted that marriage of the applicant with the Savitri (deceased) was solemnized 16 years back. It is further submitted that from a bare perusal of the F.I.R. and statements of the complainant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., it is clear that he is not the eye witness of the incident. It is further submitted that there is no direct evidence against the applicant. It is further submitted that post-mortem report does not support the prosecution story. It is further submitted that F.I.R. has been lodged against the four persons but during investigation on the basis of statements of witnesses three persons were exonerated. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence.The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.05.2020. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that witnesses Manveer and Dhan Singh have supported the prosecution story and stated about the conduct of the applicant that he was treating his wife with cruelty. It is further submitted that as per the post-mortem report the deceased has received 7 ante mortem injuries and cause of death is shown as asphyxia due to ante mortem strangulation. The applicant is a habitual offender. He has criminal history of as much as six cases which has not been explained.

In view of judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Neeru Yadav vs. State of U.P. and another (2015) 3 SCC 527, criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be ignored while deciding bail application, discretionary powers of Courts to grant bail must be exercised in a judicious manner in case of a habitual offender.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment, I do not find any good ground to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.

Order Date :- 13.3.2023

AKT