Uttarakhand High Court
CRJA/13/2023 on 13 July, 2023
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
Bail Application (IA No. 2 of 2023)
In
CRJA No.13 of 2023
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Priyanshu Gairola, learned Amicus Curiae
for the appellant
2. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General
with Mr. Rakesh Joshi and Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned
Brief Holder(s) for the State.
3. This is a criminal jail appeal filed by appellant-
Rajnish @ Raju, who has been convicted by learned Ist
Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar by reason of
judgment and order dated 07.02.2013, passed in
Sessions Trial No. 354 of 2005, whereby the appellant
was convicted for an offence punishable under Section
302 IPC and was sentenced for life imprisonment and a
fine of `5,000/- with default stipulation for further four
months simple imprisonment, under Section 3/4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and sentenced two years
rigorous imprisonment and a fine of `2,000/- in default
of payment of which, he was directed to undergo two
months simple imprisonment under Section 498-A IPC
and was sentenced for three years rigorous
imprisonment and a fine of `1,000/- in default of which
an additional simple imprisonment of one month.
4. The learned Sessions Judge further directed that
all the sentences shall run concurrently and the period
already spend in jail, prior to the conviction, shall also
be set off.
5. Today, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant
pressed the bail application.
6. Learned Amicus Curiae submitted that the
appellant has been convicted only on the basis of
conjecture and surmises without any cogent evidence;
the prosecution's case based upon the circumstantial
evidence, but there is no link in the chain of
circumstances, which would indicate only towards the
guilt of the appellant. It is also submitted that P.W.1-
Kunwar Pal, brother of the deceased-Sunita, who has
been relied upon by the prosecution to bring home the
charges against the appellant, subsequently, turned
hostile. He further strenuously argued that the knife
recovered from the scene of occurrence was never
connected with the appellant and there is no F.S.L.
report on record.
7. According to the F.I.R., the dead body of the
deceased was found in a box on the third storey of the
house of the appellant, inside a wooden box and there
were injury marks on her neck and the blood was
splattered there.
8. It is case of the prosecution that, on 30.12.2004
at about 11:00 A.M., Sunita called P.W.1-Kunwar Pal
her brother, over telephone to inform that her in-laws
were harassing her and any untoward incident might
happen. On this information, P.W.1 along with his
family members and neighbours reached the village
Agoda Kala at about 05:00 P.M. at the house of her
sister, but there was no one in the house and while
calling Sunita they reached, in the room at the third
floor of the house, the dead body was recovered from a
wooden box kept in the room.
9. It is the case of the prosecution that there were
dispute between the in-laws, husband and the deceased
for harassment towards the demand of dowry and with
the intervention of the people from the community in
the year 1999, some settlement was arrived at and
deceased-Sunita again came to her matrimonial house.
10. Per-contra, learned Deputy Advocate Geneal
submitted that it is a case of custodial death; deceased-
Sunita was murdered in the house of the husband and
her dead body was found in a wooden box at the third
floor of the house; there were cut marks on the neck and
according to the post-mortem report, three anti-mortem
injuries, incised wound were found on the neck of the
deceased; blood stained knife was also recovered from
the place of occurrence, where the dead body of the
deceased was found and it is for this reason that the
appellant was convicted by the trial court.
11. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we
are of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to
grant bail to the appellant. Consequently, the bail
application is hereby rejected.
12. List this case for final hearing in the second
week of month of December, 2023.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
13.07.2023
SK
