HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 14698 of 2019
Applicant :- Ashutosh Mishra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey,Arvind Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri C.P. Pandey, counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 942 of 2016, u/s 498A, 304B SectionI.P.C. and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S. Chhibramau, District Kannauj with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.9.2017 while recording that the applicant is husband of the deceased, who died on account of throttling and besides it, several ante mortem injuries have been noted on her person. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that three prosecution witnesses have been examined till date who are family members of the deceased and they have not supported the prosecution version for any demand of dowry or ill-treatment by the applicant or his family members. It is stated that the applicant is in jail since 13.11.2016 and thus on the ground that the witnesses have turned hostile and long incarceration of the applicant he may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that period of incarceration is not such based on which bail application may be allowed. He further submitted that the applicant can alternatively be charged for the offence u/s 302 SectionI.P.C., there is no fresh ground for granting bail to the applicant. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 13.11.2016, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial (S.T. No. 100 of 2017, SectionState vs. Ashutosh Mishra) pending in the court of Additional Session Judge/F.T.C. No. 1, Kannauj and conclude the same preferably within the period of six months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order before the trial court. Office is directed to communicate the order to the court concerned within a week.
Order Date :- 16.7.2019