Drain Court rejected an application for bail filed by Vishnu in a case involving Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court found no reason to grant indulgence despite claims of false implication and hostile witnesses.
Bail prayer rejected; applicant remained in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 54 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32645 of 2018 Applicant :- Vishnu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.146 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Khandauli, District-Agra, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the deceased against the applicant and five other family members for the alleged incident said to have been taken place on 28.04.2017. The allegation is that the daughter of the first informant was married to the applicant. She was subjected to cruelty by her in-laws for additional demand of dowry. The applicant is the husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The next contention is that two witnesses of facts have been examined and both of them have turned hostile. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.08.2017.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer and submitted that the allegations made in the FIR involves all the ingredients of Section 304-B IPC.
Under the circumstances, I do not find any good reason to grant indulgence to the applicant.
Thus, the bail application stands rejected at this stage.
It is expected from the learned trial court to gear up the trial and made necessary endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of one year provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he would furnish the certified copy of this order within fortnight.
Office is directed to transmit the copy of this order to the learned trial court for intimation and necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 28.8.2018 Sumit S
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case alleging cruelty and dowry death under Sections 498A and 304B IPC?
Whether the turning hostile of two witness statements warrants bail to the applicant?
Vishnu
State Of U.P.
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
