1
Reserved
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29239 of 2009
Manoj Kumar Pandey ...... ... ..Applicant
Vs.
State of U.P. .................... Opp. Party.
*********
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh, J.
Heard Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava, Sri Shri Prakash Dwivedi, learned
counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Sri A.K. Shukla
and Sri Sameer Jain , learned counsel for the complainant.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Manoj Kumar Pandey
with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 279 of 2009,
under sections 302, 498-A, 506 and 120-B I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry
Prohibition Act, Police Station Mughal Sarai, District Chandauli.
The facts, in brief, of this case are that the FIR of this case has been
lodged by Rama Shanker Tripathi on 9.6.2009 at 7.30 a.m. in respect of the
incident which had occurred in the night of 7/8.6.2009. It is alleged that the
marriage of the deceased Smt. Neelam was solemnized with the applicant on
10.5.2001. The applicant and other co-accused persons were not satisfied with
the articles given in the marriage of the deceased, they were demanding Rs. 5.00
lakhs, to fulfil this demand, the applicant and other co-accused persons were
torturing the deceased , the applicant was extending the threat to the deceased
to fulfil the aforesaid demand. The deceased was a student of B.Ed, her
examination was scheduled to be held from 16.6.2009, to appear in that
examination, the deceased had come to the resident of the first informant on
7.6.2009 at 6. 00 a.m., the first informant had gone to his parental house in
village Nivi Kala to attend the marriage, the deceased and her sons, namely,
Prashant aged 7 years and Priyansh aged 3 years were remained at his house.
In the night at about 2.30 a.m., the information of death of the deceased was
given to Smt. Priyanka Tripathi younger daughter of the first informant, on that
information, the first informant came to his house and saw the dead body of the
deceased, its information was given to the police station by the first informant,
on that information the inquest report was prepared, thereafter, the post mortem
examination was done and dead body of the deceased was cremated then the
FIR has been lodged, it is alleged that the alleged incident was witnessed by his
son Prashant, according to the post mortem examination report, the deceased
2
had sustained 3 mortem injuries, the cause of death was due to strangulation. It
is pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR of this case
is too much delayed, it has been lodged after great thought and consultation. The
naming of the applicant in FIR is after thought, he has been named in the FIR
due ulterior motive only on the basis of doubt and suspicion.
During investigation, the statement of Prashant Tripathi, the son of
the applicant has been record, according to school certificate, his date of birth is
28.7.2004. He was aged about 6 years, no reliance can be placed on the
statement of a minor child Prashant who stated that he saw the applicant when
he was strangulating the deceased by using rope.
In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. that the
applicant is husband of the deceased, the cause of death was due to
strangulation, the alleged incident has been witnessed by Prashant Tripathi, the
son of the applicant, according to his statement, the deceased was strangulated
by the applicant by using rope, the witness is the child, who is innocent, there is
no reason to disbelieve his statement at this stage. The applicant is the main
accused, he may not be released on bail.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant,
learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and from the perusal of the
record it appears that in this case, the FIR has been lodged against the applicant.
The statement of Prashant, aged about 7 years, has been recorded by the I.O.,
he is the son of the applicant and the deceased. According to his statement, the
applicant has committed the murder of the deceased by way of strangulation with
rope. According to post mortem examination report, the deceased had sustained
3 ante mortem injuries, the cause of death was due to strangulation and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for
bail. The prayer for bail is refused.
Accordingly, this application is rejected.
Dated : January 27, 2010 SU