HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 54332 of 2019
Applicant :- Wajid
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shabana Nizam
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is husband of the deceased. The marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased about 5-6 years back from the date of the alleged incident. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. In postmortem report the cause of death of the deceased has been shown asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Except the ligature mark no other injuries has been found on the body of the deceased. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased. The applicant was living at Saudia and there he earns the bread and butter however, the deceased was got two female child, who born handicapped and thereafter died, however at last one male child was born who is also handicapped due to which the deceased used to live in depression and due to depression the deceased has committed suicide. It has further been submitted that during the trial the statement of informant Jiya Uddin has been recorded as P.W. 1 in his cross examination he has not supported the prosecution version and has stated that there was no dispute of demand of dowry. He has also stated that the deceased gave birth three children and two of them have died and one is alive and he is handicapped due to which the deceased was in depression. P.W. 2 Jamaluddin (uncle of the deceased) in his cross examination has also not supported the prosecution version and has stated that there was no dispute of demand of dowry. P.W. 3 Sahana Begum (cousin sister of the deceased) has also stated that the deceased had not made any complaint against her in-laws. P.W. 6 Aisha Begum (mother of the deceased) has also stated that two daughters have been born from the wedlock of the deceased and her husband, who were handicapped and they died. P.W 4 constable Santosh Kumar Yadav and P.W. 5 Gyanendra Singh are formal witnesses of the alleged incident. There is no other cogent evidence against the applicant. It has further been submitted that the applicant has not committed the alleged offence. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 18.8.2017.
Per contra, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Wajid involved in Case Crime No. 616 of 2017, under Sections 498A, Section304B, Section323, Section506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gaurabadshahpur, District Jaunpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 7.12.2019