This is a bail application in a case headed for punishment for crime causing death. The court noted the gravity of the offence and severity of punishment. The application was rejected.
Application rejected; direction to expedite trial within six months.
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. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7492 of 2020
Applicant :- Harish Chandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
This is a second application for bail. The first bail application being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.37811 of 2017 was rejected by this Court by an order dated 11.12.2018.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Harish Chandra in connection with Case Crime No.1247 of 2016, under Section 323, 325 and 304 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, district Etah.
The first information of this incident was lodged by the complainant, father-in-law of the applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that the marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the applicant. It was further alleged that after the marriage out of their wedlock when she gave birth to a baby girl, the applicant had committed marpit with his wife (deceased). The police investigated the matter and submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant. The prosecution witnesses have fully supported the case.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the applicant is in jail since 02.10.2016 and the trial has not yet been concluded.
Sri Manuraj Singh, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea and has submitted that the applicant was in a habit of consuming the liquor. He submitted that the deceased was brutally beaten by the applicant after consuming the liquor when she gave birth to a baby girl. He submitted that the deceased had received seven ante-mortem injuries on her person. The medical report of the deceased shows that the deceased had received fatal injuries in her head and there
was blood clotting in brain.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected with a direction to the court below that the trial of the aforesaid case be expedited and positively be concluded within six months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 7.8.2020 R./
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the bail application of Harish Chandra in the offence under Sections 304, 323 and 325 IPC deserves allowance in view of gravity of offence and facts disclosed.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Harish Chandra
Ajit Singh, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
