Allahabad High Court
Sandeep Chaubey vs State Of U.P. on 8 May, 2023
Bench: Mohd. Azhar Idrisi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 92
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3309 of 2022
Appellant :- Sandeep Chaubey
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Vinay Kumar Patel,Yashwant Pratap Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.
Order on Criminal Misc. (Suspension of Sentence) Application No. 2 of 2022
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
Application for suspension of sentence is moved on behalf of the accused appellant Sandeep Chaubey, who has been convicted in Sessions Trial No. 264 of 2018 (State Vs. Sandeep Chaubey) arising out of case crime 57 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and alternate Section 302/34 IPC and Section Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sujanganj, District Jaunpur and the maximum sentence awarded to him is nine years imprisonment. The rest of the sentences are lesser sentences.
It is alleged that on account of non-fulfillment of additional demand of dowry the daughter of the informant was burnt to death by the husband and mother-in-law of the deceased on 24.4.2018 by pouring kerosene on her and setting her ablaze.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the marriage of the appellant was solemnised with the victim (deceased) on 1.2.2014 according to the Hindu Rite and Rituals and from their wedlock one child was born. It is further submitted that when the appellant was not present at his house an unfortunate accident was taken place on 24.4.2018, in which the victim was burnt and she was taken away by the appellant at CHC Maharajganj and thereafter Doctor referred her to District Jaunpur where during treatment she died. No dying declaration of the deceased was recorded. It is next submitted that the appellant is absolutely innocent and had no motive or reasons whatsoever to commit the criminal incident as alleged by the prosecution. There are contradictions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. In this view of the matter, the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court is wholly illegal and against the material evidence on record. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that as per the custody certificate, as on 11.3.2023, the appellant has actually remained in jail including remission for a period of 4 years, 10 months & 15 days. The chance of appeal being heard and decided in near future is very bleak due to heavy dockets, as such, the appellant be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the appellant and vehemently contended that the appellant is husband of the deceased and there is specific allegation against him. A perusal of the record shows that additional demand of dowry has been made by the appellant. The deceased was burnt to death within four years of marriage. According to the doctor, there was injury in the throat of hyoid bone and it was broken. Cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia due to severe flamed injury about 80% burnt all over body. It is further contended that the finding recorded by the learned trial court is based on cogent and convincing reasons, hence it cannot be said that the view taken by the court below is perverse or unreasonable, as such, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to appellant, severity of punishment, I do not find any good ground to release the appellant on bail.
In view of the above, application for suspension of sentence is rejected.
Order on appeal
List the appeal for final hearing in due course.
Meanwhile, Registry to prepare paper book, if not already prepared.
Order Date :- 8.5.2023
Israr
