INDRAPAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a bail application moved on behalf of husband who is facing the charge of committing dowry death of his wife.

(2.) Submission is that though this is said to be a case of dowry death but admittedly to the prosecution side the deceased died as a result of ante mortem hanging. The post mortem report does not indicate any mark of violence on her body. Further submission is that the information about her death was duly given to her parents on which they had also arrived on the place of occurrence. Attention was drawn to Annexure-SA-1 filed along with supplementary affidavit which is information given by the father of the deceased to the police in which no allegation of demand of dowry or ill-treatment committed against the deceased was made and it was specifically stated in the initial information. that none of the in-laws or husband are to blame for the death of his daughter. It was also stated in this F.I.R. that she was suffering from some internal illness and being fed up and frustrated by the same she has committed suicide. The inquest proceedings of deceased were performed and even at that time the first informant and his son themselves were made witnesses of the inquest proceedings. Subsequently, after a lapse of more than twenty days the present F.I.R. in question was lodged against the applicant and entirely false and frivolous allegations of demand of dowry and ill-treatment meted out to deceased were made. Contention is that had there been any truth in these allegations, there was no reason for making a contradictory report earlier and there was also no explanation as to why this subsequent F.I.R. was lodged with so much inordinate delay. Submission is that in the aforesaid circumstances the false implication of the applicant is manifestly apparent on the face of record. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.2.2015 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

(3.) Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.