Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAJENDRA versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rajendra v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 27905 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 21311 (18 December 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Ravindra Singh , J.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

This application has been filed by the applicant Rajendra with the prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 94 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 201 I.P.C. and Sections ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. P.S. Chandi Nagar, District Baghpat.

According to the prosecution version the alleged occurrence had taken place after two years of the marriage of the deceased. It is said that there was demand of dowry and to fulfill the same the deceased was subjected with cruelty. Ultimately she was murdered and her cremation was done without any information to the first informant and the police station concerned. The applicant is the husband of the deceased.

It is contended that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. It is said that the applicant is innocent. He has not committed the alleged offence. The deceased died due to heart attack. Its information was properly given to the first informant and his relatives.

In reply of the above submission the learned A.G.A. submits that the deceased has been murdered within two years  of her marriage to fulfill the demand of dowry and the applicant is the husband of the deceased. He is main accused. The dead body of the deceased has been cremated and being the main accused the applicant is not entitled for bail.

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and without  expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail, therefore, the prayer for bail is refused.

However, it is directed that the proceedings of the trial shall be expedited without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the side.

Office is directed to sent the copy of this order to the learned Sessions Judge, Baghpat for compliance.

With the above directions the application is finally disposed of.

Dt: 18.12.2006

Rcv/27905-06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.