SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shaheed vs State Of U.P. on 19 August, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 31507 of 2019

Applicant :- Shaheed

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Shilpa Ahuja,Nand Kishor Mishra

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra (B.H.), learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the record.

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely, Shahid, Yaqub, Rahees, Varish and Shabana alleging that Rajiya was married in the year 2010 with the applicant (Shahid) and on 28.7.2018 they killed her by throwing kerosene oil and set her on fire. She received burn injuries.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that due to husband he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.9.2019 (eleven months) having no criminal history. The applicant has admitted the deceased in the hospital. She committed suicide herself. Nobody had killed the deceased. There is no independent witness/eye witness account against the applicant. In case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that deceased was died in the house of the applicant and his son Saif Raja had specifically stated against the applicant alleging that applicant had killed his mom (mother) by burn injuries. Presumption under Section 106 of the Evidence Act will lie against the applicant. The applicant is the main accused. There is no chance of false implication. Therefore, his bail application is liable to be rejected.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, gravity of offence, without entering into the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby rejected at this stage in Case Crime No. 190 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section302 I.P.C. and Section 3/Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kulpahar, District Mahoba.

It is expected from the trial court to decide the case of the applicant expeditiously according to Section 309 Cr.P.C. on day to day basis, if there is no legal impediment.

D.M. S.P./S.S.P,- Mahoba are directed to ensure the presence of the witnesses summoned before the court below.

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned within three days for compliance.

Order Date :- 19.8.2019/OP

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation