The court rejected a bail application under Section 439 CrPC. The applicant, the husband of the deceased, was charged with murder (Section 302 IPC) and dowry-related offenses. The court held the specific cause of death indicated by injuries and found circumstances did not show false implication.
Bail application rejected.
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.
fdCourt No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5172 of 2020
Applicant :- Ajeet Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nasiruzzaman,Mohit Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.G.A.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Ajeet, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 726 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 302, 120-B I.P.C., registered at P.S. Tappal, District Aligarh.
The prosecution case as per the F.I.R lodged on 26.10.2018 at about 00:34 hrs is that on 25.10.2018 at about 16:00 hrs the sister of the first informant namely Smt. Anita was married to the present applicant, Ajeet on 25.07.2009. In the marriage approximately Rs. 10 lakhs were spent. After sometimes the family members of Anita being Smt. Virendi (mother-in-law), Ajeet (husband), Ashok (Jeth), Smt. Manju (Jethani) used to demand dowry of Rs. 2 lakhs in cash and Swift and because of the non-fulfillment of the same the deceased used to be beaten up and abused by them. The accused persons were made to talk by the first informant but they did not mend their ways and continued to torture the deceased. Even relatives and other respectable persons of the society were involved in the matter who also tried to sort out the dispute. The first informant showed his inability to meet their demands. The accused persons did not mend their ways and continued behaving in the same manner. Subsequently, the deceased on the pretext of some function was taken to village Kamalpur, P.S. Tappal, District Aligarh at the house of Raj Kumar, the maternal uncle / Mama of the applicant and on 25.10.2018 at about 04:00 p.m. all the accused persons conspired together and due to the non fulfillment of dowry murdered his sister. The information about the murder was given by some unknown person on telephone of the first informant at about 04:30 p.m. on the same day.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that in the present matter 03 villages are concerned which are Village Bania Khera, P.S. Gonda, District Aligarh being the village of the applicant, Village Edalpur, P.S. Khair, District Aligarh being the village of the first informant and Village Kamalpur, P.S. Tappal,
District Aligarh as the house of Raj Kumar where the present incident is said to have taken place. The inquest in the body of the deceased was conducted at the house of Raj Kumar in which the opinion was that as there was no visible mark of injury poisoning was suspected. Subsequently, the post mortem examination was conducted in which the doctor found a contusion on the body of the deceased with fracture on 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th rib on the right side. The internal injuries as noted were laceration of right Pleura and right lung and laceration of right lobe of lever. The cause of death was opined as Hemorrhage and shock as a result of Ante Mortem injury. Further visara was preserved and the doctor opined that report of toxicological examination will be needed for suspicion of poison. It has further been argued that Smt. Virendi @ Devendri (mother-in-law) of the deceased who is also an accused has given a statement which is Annexure- 6 in which she has stated that the applicant and the deceased were not enjoying good relationship between them. She further states that there was a lot of interference of the family members of the deceased in her life. The deceased had consumed some poisonous substance and was taken to the doctor where she was declared dead.
Learned counsel for the applicant further places reliance on the statements of the witnesses namely Satya Prakash and Bobby Sharma to demonstrate that the relationship between the applicant and the deceased were not good. He places reliance on paragraph 10 of the affidavit to demonstrate that the applicant pleads alibi as at the time of the incident he was present on his duty at Studds Helmet Factory at Faridabad. He further argued that it is not a case under Section 304-B I.P.C. but is a case under Section 302 I.P.C. and the prosecution has to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts. To conclude his argument, he argued that it appears that under the influence of poison the deceased fell down from stairs and received injuries on the right side of her body as a result of which she died. It is further argued that the case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. The applicant is the husband of the deceased but is not involved in the matter any how. The applicant is in jail since 14.11.2018.
Per contra learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The statement given by Smt. Virendi @ Devendri is false as the version regarding the cause of death is not even indicated in the post mortem report by the doctor. It is further argued that since there was a suspicion of poisoning in the inquest as such the doctors found it safe to preserve the visara and sent if for chemical examination. The cause of death is specific and due to
the injury received by the deceased which has corresponding internal damages in the organs. It is further argued that there has been consistent demand of dowry. The deceased was taken to the house of Raj Kumar intentionally and in a pre planned manner by the applicant and his family members for committing her murder so that they may take a defense that she did not die at her maternal house. There is no information whatsoever given by the accused persons to the police regarding the death of the deceased. The applicant being husband does not deserve any sympathy from the Court.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is clear that the cause of death of the deceased is specific and has been specified in the post mortem which is due to the injury received by her as noted in it having damages to the internal organs. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The circumstances as lead by the prosecution against the applicant at the present moment do not in any manner show his false implication and do not lead to a conclusion that they are insufficient at this stage against him.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case the bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 13.2.2020 AS Rathor
(Samit Gopal,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in a murder trial involving dowry allegations.
Whether the circumstances lead to a conclusion of false implication against the applicant at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajeet
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
