SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Teenu vs State Of U.P. on 2 August, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 31071 of 2019

Applicant :- Teenu

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Hari Pratap Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant alleging that Shushma Devi, daughter of the complainant, was married before two years with applicant. The applicant was drinker and on 29.8.2017 he killed the deceased by throttling and dead body was thrown in drainage (Nala).

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.9.2017 (one year and ten months) having no criminal history. There is no possibility to get this case decided in near future due to heavy load work in the trial court. Due to husband he has been falsely implicated in this case. 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 killed within two years of marriage. According to postmortem report, deceased received three anti-mortem injuries including head and neck. 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. 532 of 2017 in Session Case No. 1493 of 2017, under Section 498A, Section304B, Section302 I.P.C., Police Station Kandhla, District Shamli.

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,- Shamli 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 :- 2.8.2019/OP

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 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