HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 33650 of 2019
Applicant :- Firoj
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of this application.
The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.92 of 2017, under Sections 498A, Section304-B, Section323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Masoori, District Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in this case admittedly marriage took place in the year 2015 and there was no demand of dowry raised by the applicant. No specific allegation was ever made upto this stage against the applicant; and the applicant has been roped in, in this case merely because he is the husband of the deceased. Further added that while the deceased- Rubina- cooking food, caught fire due to which she sustained burn injuries. The applicant himself tried to extricate his wife from the fire and in that effort, he also sustained 15 to 20% burn injuries and he was admitted in the Hospital for 5 to 6 days. Charge- sheet shows name of 26 witnesses in all, whereas, no witness of the locality has been named in the charge sheet, which casts doubt on fairness of the investigation. So far as allegation of demand of dowry is concerned, there is casual demand of one motorcycle, which under circumstance is not worth believable and acceptable. Applicant is having one child aged about 8 months born out of the wedlock between the deceased and the applicant. Applicant has no criminal antecedent. He is a law abiding citizen and in case, applicant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of absconding or misusing the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that since the applicant is husband of the deceased, therefore, the presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is very much applicable against him. It is admitted fact that the marriage took place within seven years and as per the FIR and the charge- sheet filed and the statement recorded by the Investigating Officer, which is also subject to the scrutiny for the time being before the trial court, there is positive evidence that the additional demand of dowry was raised; and the very manner of the committing of the offence by the applicant itself speaks of something fishy and it cannot be conclusively said that the deceased committed suicide independently of allegations made in the FIR and the reason for the same was altogether extraneous to her. As per the allegation made and the statement recorded, every ingredients of Section 304B IPC is complete. Lastly, he submits that the magnitude of the burn injuries are 100% and there was no individual witness, who testified fact that the deceased caught fire while cooking food and the applicant sustained injury while trying to extricate her from fire and in his effort, he has got burn injuries.
After hearing the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant, the reply by the learned A.G.A. and upon perusal of the various documents annexed with the present bail application and also looking to the allegations made in the FIR, and considering the gravity of the offence, no good ground is made out for bail.
Accordingly, this bail application is rejected at this stage.
The observation so made in the body of this order shall not prejudice proceeding of the trial court while deciding the case on merit.
Order Date :- 20.8.2019