Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUKKHU @ SUKHRAM versus STATE OF U.P

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sukkhu @ Sukhram v. State Of U.P - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 10249 of 2005 [2006] RD-AH 295 (4 January 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

Court No. 19

Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.10249 of 2005

Sukkhu alias Sukhram.....Vs.....State of U.P.

...

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh, J.

Counter affidavit has been filed today. Let it be taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and also perused the material on record.

The applicant is involved in case crime No.81 of 2005, for the offence under Section 302/498-A I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali (Hata), district Kushinagar.

It is alleged that after solemnizing the marriage, additional demand of dowry in shape of motor cycle was being made. Somehow the matter was conciliated after giving a buffalo. However, on 5.3.2005 an information was received by the complainant that his cousin sister (Sarswati) has died. She was having an advance pregnancy of 8 months. The inquest report was prepared and thereafter her post mortem was also conducted. Four ante mortem injuries consisting of contusions on the front side were found on her body. The cause of death is reported to be respiratory failure (asphyxia) and haemorrhage shock as a result of ante mortem injuries. Initially the report was lodged under Sections 306, 498-A and 304-B IPC but on the basis of post mortem report it was converted under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC and ¾ D.P.Act.. Thereafter it was converted under Section 302 IPC on account of marriage being found beyond seven years.

As against the genuineness of the prosecution case and the proposed supporting evidence, it was argued that when the case was converted under Section 302 IPC and this being a case based on circumstantial evidence, the onus to prove has shifted on the prosecution side. From the perusal of the inquest report it appears that some doubt was expressed when the lady who was carrying 8 months' pregnancy died either as a result of snake bite or after consuming poison because the dead body was becoming bluish and some white material was oozing out from her mouth. But the post mortem report rules out any of those possibilities.  As the case has come out of the ambit of 304 IPC, there cannot be any presumption regarding unnatural death. It was emphasized that if the version of the FIR is taken to be true that the husband applicant was an having extra marital relation with his elder brother's wife (Bhabhi) then she might have killed the lady. There should be some prima facie evidence to show the intention to kill and the actual committal of murder. It was also pointed out that if the elder brother's wife was entangled with the (applicant) then in that case the elder brother Dr. Arun Kumar could not have connived with his wife and younger brother          ( applicant ) in the alleged murder of the lady.

The bail is, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A.

The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction of the Court  regarding  proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution  case were duly considered.

 In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, taking into  consideration some of the arguments, advanced on behalf of the applicant in respect of the points discussed herein above particularly the nature of circumstantial evidence and fluctuating prosecution evidence, without prejudice to the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.  

Dt. 4.1.2006.

Zh


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.