Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHARAN SINGH versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Charan Singh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 6197 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 12587 (23 July 2007)

 

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

Reserved.

Court No. 49

Criminal Misc. Second Bail application No. 6197 of 2006

Charan Singh Vs. State of U.P.

Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

Charan Singh has filed second bail application for release in case crime no. 870 of 2003 under Sections 302, 201, 498-A, 304 B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Mahoba. First bail application was rejected on merits by order dated 15.9.2005.

Heard Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri R. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record.

Bried facts of the case are that accused is alleged to have committed murder of his wife Smt. Gyatri Devi in the night of 12/11/2003 at about 2 a.m. First information report was lodged by Rajjab the village chaukidar at 4.10. a.m. on 12.11.2003 alleging that he heard the noise of Nandkishore that some miscreants had entered his house to commit theft and had killed Gyatri Devi wife of Charan Singh brother of Nandkishore and that thieves had runaway. On hearing the noise Rajjab, Kunja and Babloo came to the house of Nandkishore and found that the dead body of Gyatri Devi was lying there. There were wounds on the neck. They saw Devideen coming out of the Bara with the box of the deceased and none else excepting the mother of the accused was present in the house. Initially report was lodged under Section 460 IPC.

The post mortem examination was conducted and two incised wounds were found on the neck of the deceased. During investigation it came to light that Smt. Gyatri Devi was murdered by the accused applicant and Nand Kishore. Devideen his nephew had helped in fabricating the story of theft. After investigation charge sheet was submitted on 16.11.2003 against Charan Singh and two others under Sections 302, 201 IPC. Bhawani Deen father of the deceased gave a report on 16.11.2003 alleging that his daughter was married with accused and dowry was given but accused was not satisfied and he demanded motorcycle as additional dowry. Deceased used to call her father that she was harassed and ill-treated. On 27.4.2003 when her father in law came to take her he was told that his daughter was not willing to go because of harassment. However, at that time   complainant gave Rs. 10,000/- and assured to give some money later. But on 15.11.2003 he was informed by the police that his daughter had been killed. He came to Nathupura and was told that accused applicant and his other family members had killed Smt. Gyatri Devi and efforts were made to conceal the offence. However on further investigation a charge sheet under Section 498-A, 304 B, 201 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P.Act was also submitted.

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that trial of the case is not proceedings as it has been stayed by this Court vide order passed on 6.10.2004 in criminal Misc. Case No. 10717 of 2004 (filed by the applicant and other accused) and the accused is unnecessarily languishing in jail.

Learned A.G.A. has contended that the miscellaneous proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been unnecessarily filed by the applicant and other accused themselves and if the proceedings have been stayed it is at the instance of the accused themselves and that they have not taken any steps to get that miscellaneous case heard and decided as yet. The record of the miscellaneous case no. 10717 of 2004 has also been requisitioned and I have perused it. Accused persons including the present applicant filed this application for quashing, staying the second charge sheet. Record shows that applicant did not file any application for expeditious hearing or even for listing of that matter at an early date. If two charge sheets have been submitted against the accused persons in the same crime and same sessions trial, it cannot be said that the accused has to face two trials as contended on behalf of the accused. The incident is one and the accused has been alleged to have killed his wife. Charges under Section 302, 304-B IPC can be in alternate also. The accused therefore cannot be given any benefit if the proceedings have been stayed at his own instance. Applicant  should take steps to get the miscellaneous case heard and decided at the earliest.

In the circumstances, I do not fine any ground to release the applicant on bail and the second bail application is liable to be rejected and is hereby rejected.

The file of misc. case no. 10717 of 2004 be detached and be sent back to the concerned Section for early listing.

Dated: 23.7.2007

RKS/


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.