Gurudayal v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15229 of 2018

Applicant :- Gurudayal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

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

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 476 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Shohratgarh, district-Siddharth Nagar, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

The first information report of the incident was lodged by the complainant about the unnatural death of his daughter Sushila, who was married with the present accused on 17.5.2011. It was also mentioned in the FIR that husband and father-in-law of the daughter of the complainant were demanding additional dowry from the deceased and due to non fulfilment of the aforesaid demand of dowry, she was murdered by them in her matrimonial home on 11.2.2017.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased was short tempered and before the date of incident an altercation took place between her and her husband and due to which she committed suicide. He next submits that the applicant who is the husband of the deceased Sushila has been falsely implicated in the present case by his father-in-law although the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial home on 11.2.2017. There is no evidence of abatement, enticement or aid against the applicant. Further submission is that there is general allegation in the FIR and the co-accused Ghurahu, who is father-in-law of the deceased has already been enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.5.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 17810 of 2017, copy of bail order produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. He also submits that only one prosecution witness has been examined till date and there is no possibility that the trial will be concluded in near future. He lastly submits that the postmortem