High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Munna Lal v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 8132 of 2006  RD-AH 11428 (13 July 2006)
Court No. 54
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 8132 OF 2006.
Munna Lal Vs. State of U.P.
Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastava, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged which are kept on record.
The applicant is the husband. The marriage of the deceased with the applicant had taken place three years prior to the date of occurrence. Rs. 20,000/- was demanded towards dowry, which the parent of the deceased could not fulfill. The husband and his family members subjected the deceased to cruelty and harassment for non fulfillment of aforesaid demand. On 2.9.2005, the complainant came to know that his daughter died in her in-laws house and was cremated without any information to the police. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it is stated that the family members of the deceased reached when the body of the deceased was completely burnt.
The submission on behalf of the applicant is that the first information report was registered after three days for the reason that the family members of the deceased wanted to extract some money which was not accepted by the applicant and his family members. The next submission is that the deceased Smt. Gaison alias Manita Devi died a natural death. She has developed brain fever since 26.8.2005 and was given medical treatment by Dr. Rama Shankar Prasad of Rama Medical Hospital Manjhanpur, Kaushambi. On 1.9.2005, she was referred to Bailly Hospital, Allahabad but while taken away to her to Bailly Hospital, Allahabad, she died.
After hearing the respective counsel for the parties at length and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is husband and medical report is of private doctor, which has not been admitted by the Investigating Officer in his counter affidavit, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail. The bail application is rejected at this stage.
Counsel for the applicant states that the trial has not yet completed and the applicant is in jail since considerable length of time.
Learned Sessions Judge, Kaushambi is directed to expedite and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date, a certified copy of this order is produced before him without granting undue adjournment to either parties unless and until compelling circumstances arise to do so.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.