Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19460 of 2009 Petitioner :- Ramkripal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- P.C. Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Amar Saran,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional
Government Advocate.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in this
case the FIR itself alleges that the deceased was set on fire 20-25
days prior to the lodging of the FIR and several times the deceased
was admitted in the hospital and then got discharged and due to
negligence he died and for this reason the FIR was only lodged
under section 304 IPC.
It is further argued that the dying declaration appears to be a
procured document.
Per contra, learned AGA argued that there is no reason for the
informant to have implicated the close relation of the deceased for
this crime in which an attempt was made to set on fire the
deceased by pouring kerosene oil over him by which he got burnt
and subsequently expired.
Having considered the submissions of the parties, I am not inclined
to grant bail tothe applicant.
The bail application is rejected.
However, in the circumstances of the case, the trial is expedited.
The trial court is directed to try and conclude the trial as far as
possible within four months from the date of receipt of a certified
copy of this order provided the applicant cooperates with the trial.
Order Date :- 7.1.2010
Ishrat