Sandesh v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 45

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13581 of 2019

Applicant :- Sandesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated for offence under Section 306, IPC; that as per averments made in FIR lodged by Balvir with inordinate delay on 24.4.2018 through application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. dated 12.12.2017 regarding incident in question dated 13.11.2017, Ramveer and Surendra, sons of family uncle of first informant and his relative Sandesh, applicant was on inimical terms due to property dispute and on 17.9.2017 co-accused Ramveer, Surendra etc. forcibly taken possession over land of first informant and obtained stamp paper alleging it to be deed of partition obtaining signature and photo of Phool Singh, father of first informant and on 11.11.2017 following some dispute over taking forcible possession there was some hot talks and Ramveer had untied she-buffalo on the land of first informant and on 13.11.2017 when Smt. Ramsamari, mother of first informant was harvesting crop of groundnut and her son Neelesh had taken lunch at the field, applicant and co-accused persons administered some poisonous substance in water due to which his mother Ramsamari died at about 2.00 p.m. in the agricultural field; that in postmortem report of deceased cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved and as per rejection order passed by Session Judge on 23.2.2019 Forensic Lab Report dated 6.12.2018 states that organophosphorus insecticides poison was found in parts of her viscera; that applicant neither administered poisonous substance in the water nor aided, abeted or instigated deceased for committing suicide in any manner whatsoever; that FIR itself indicates that there was family dispute between first informant and co-accused Ramveer and Surendra and applicant has no concern with their property dispute; that case of the applicant is distinguishable from Ramveer and Surendra; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 13.2.2019.