VIPIN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This application has been filed by the applicant Vipin Kumar with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1142 of 2006 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4, D.P. Act, P.S. Chandpur, district Bijnore.

(2.) THE prosecution story in brief is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Mahipal Singh at P.S. Chandpur on 14.8.2006 at about 6.30 a.m., in respect of the incident which had occurred on 14.8.2006 at about 2.00 a.m. THE F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and other co-accused Rajiv Kumar alleging therein that the marriage of the deceased Smt. Poonam Devi was solemnized with the applicant on 22.6.2005, but the applicant and other co-accused was not satisfied with the gifts given in marriage, they were subjecting the deceased to cruelty. THEreafter in the month of January, the applicant demanded Rs. 50,000 the same amount was given by the first informant to the applicant, thereafter the applicant raised a demand of Rs. 20,000 and Rs. 15,000. and thereafter the first informant went to the house of the applicant on 22.6.2006 to call the deceased but the deceased was not sent with the first informant by the applicant and other co-accused. And they put a condition to send the deceased on the fulfilment of the above mentioned demand. THEreafter, the first informant came back to his house and after two days again he alongwith his brother Jasveer went to the house of the applicant and other co-accused persons who made the demand of dowry but on the assurance given by the first informant that the deceased was sent to alongwith the first informant but after the expiry of 8 or ten days the applicant sent information and put the demand of money, on 13.8.2006 at about 7.00 p.m. the applicant and his brother Raajiv alias Chandra Pal came to the house of the first informant and after taking the meal Chandra Pal, left the house of the first informant. THE applicant and his brother stayed in at the place house of first informant. THEy called the deceased at about 2.00 a.m. where they commit the murder of the deceased.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the deceased died at the place of first informant ; she has not died at the place of the applicant. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The allegation against him is false and frivolous. And there is no credible evidence in support of the allegation made against the applicant. The deceased has committed suicide at her brother's house because according to the post mortem examination report the cause of death is hanging. The deceased has received one ligature mark on the neck and no other injury was found there on her neck. The applicant is innocent and he has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated due to ill will of the first informant.