SATYA NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

(2.) Perused the record.

(3.) The only submission raised by the counsel is that the F.I.R. has been lodged with delay having no proper explanation for the same. An incident said to have taken place on 22.8.2016 while the F.I.R. was lodged on 11.9.2016. Submission is that had there been any truth in the allegations with regard to the demand of motorcycle as has been alleged and had there been any truth in the allegation of any cruelty committed towards the wife by the applicant or any of his family members, there was no question for the first informant to have waited for such a long time and for not lodging the F.I.R. at the earliest. The wholly unexplained inordinate delay goes a long way to discredit the allegations regarding the demand of dowry and cruelty committed towards the wife. The falsity regarding the same stands completely exposed. Further submission is that applicant had duly informed the police after his wife committed suicide and that also speaks about his clean conscience. If he had any guilty mind, there was no need for him to approach the police and bring the occurrence into the knowledge of the police. The police arrived at the place of occurrence on the information furnished by the applicant himself and the inquest proceeding took place thereafter. Contention is that though the applicant's wife committed suicide within a very short period of marriage but there was absolutely no reason for the applicant to harass the deceased. In fact, what was gathered by the applicant after his marriage was that she had some undesirable relationship with some boy when she was still in her parental house and as the marriage was solemnized against her wishes that resulted into a completely frustrated life for her and being unhappy with the marriage and having failed to get reconciled with it she took the extreme step. 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 and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26.10.2016 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.