Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KISHUN LAL @ MASHALU & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Kishun Lal @ Mashalu & Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 20442 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 2708 (6 February 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.1                                                                                                                                                                              

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20442 of 2004

Kishun Lal @ Mashalu  and another   Vs.   .  . . .State of U.P.

---

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J.

The applicant has applied for  bail  in Case  Crime No. 221 of 2004 ,  under sections 498-A, 304B and 201 I.P.C  and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act  Police Station    Rampur   District  Jaunpur.

The bail application , in respect of  the applicant  no. 2  Hub Lal, was  partly  allowed  by Hon'ble C. P.Misra, J vide  order dated 23.12.2004   on the ground that  he was  cousin father - in - law  of the deceased  and     he was residing  in a separate house . The prayer  for grant  of bail to   applicant no.1  Kishun Lal  was, however,  kept pending .

Heard   the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State  in respect of  bail application of  applicant no.1 Kishun Lal alias Mashalau and perused the record.

The prosecution  case starts with a F.I.R.  lodged by Sri Sant Lal Gupta  at  Police Station  Rampur  District  Jaunpur  on 14.8..2004 at 3.30  P.M.  It was  stated therein that  the marriage of his  daughter   Smt.  Sudha   had taken place with the accused   Sant Lal Gupta . On 31.7.04 he received  information  that  Hub Lal  and Mashalu  sons of  Baudam Gupta  had murdered  Sudha   and   after committingr murder   her  dead body  was disposed of. Sudha was being tortured  by her in laws  in  connection with  demand of dowry  and she used to complain    the atrocities   being committed  by her in laws.

On the basis of  above report a case  under sections 498A/304 B/201 I.P.C. were  registered against the accused , her  in laws  Subsequently  on the basis of  so called  suicidal note  of Smt. Sudha  it was converted   under section 306 I.P.C.  Thereafter  during investigation the names of  Smt. Prema  Devi  wife of  Ram Kishun alias Mashalu and Smt. Urmila Devi  wife of  Hub Lal  were also  added  and ultimately , after  investigation, a charge sheet was  submitted  against   the above named  four accused persons under sections 498-A, 304B and 201 I.P.C  and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act.

The applicant has alleged that  he  is innocent and he has  falsely been implicated.  Learned counsel for the applicant  referred to  suicidal note  of Smt. Sudha  and contended that  it was a case  of suicide  committed by her  and  actually  there was no demand of dowry  nor any atrocity  was committed upon  her  and that is why   the case was  converted under section 306 I.P.C.  but thereafter  under pressure  of the complainant the  names of    Smt.  Prema Devi wife of  Ram Kishan alias Mashalu and Smt. Urmila  Devi wife of  Hub Lal  were also  included  and charge sheet was submitted under section 304 B I.P.C.  It was submitted  that  in this case except  the applicant  Kishun Lal  all other  accused  have already been granted bail and so  the applicant  should also be  bailed out.

Learned A.G.A.  opposed the bail application and  he  submitted in reply that   the bail was granted to   Smt. Prema Devi and Urmila Devi  because they were not named in the F.I.R.  and Hub Lal  was  residing in a separate house  and was not  a family  member of  Ram Kishun. He  submitted that  the applicant  Ram Kishun is real  father  in law  of the deceased  and  deceased was residing  in  his house . He further pointed out  that the  husband of the deceased was residing  at Bombay for his  livelihood  and since there was no  allegation against him he was not implicated in  the case. It was further  submitted that  actually  there was  demand of dowry  and  atrocities were being committed  by  accused  upon   the deceased and the  malafidies of the accused are  clear from this fact that  after the death of  Sudha  no information was given  either to  her parents  or to the police   and  the dead body was disposed of  without  preparation of  inquest report and post mortem report. He submitted that  even if  it  was a case of  suicide  as alleged by the accused  and even if  she had left  suicidal note  , it was  essential  to give information  to the authority  concerned about the  incident  so that  inquest report  might have been prepared  and  post mortem   of the dead  body  could be performed . It was not done so . Learned counsel  for the applicant submitted in reply that  the father of the deceased was informed  and he was  present  at  the time  of  cremation. Learned A.G.A. submits that  there is nothing on record to  show  that any information was given  to the  parents of the deceased  and any one  of their family was present when  funeral  of the  deceased took place and so  the applicant does not deserve bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case but  taking into consideration  the aforesaid fact that   the dead body  of the deceased was  disposed of  without any information to the parents of the deceased  and  without  preparation of the inquest report  and  without performing  post mortem of the  dead body,  I am of the   view that  the applicant does not deserve bail. The application is  rejected.

However,  since it appears  from perusal of the record that the case is pending  for trial  and the applicant has been in Jail  since October,2004,  the trial court shall try  to conclude  the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order  and if   trial is not concluded  within the aforesaid period  for no  fault of  the accused , the applicant would be at liberty to move  a fresh  bail application .

Let a copy of this order  be sent to the   Sessions Judge , Jaunpur  immediately  by the Office.

Dt.6.2.2006

MLK/3


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.