Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 3861 (ALL)

Om Prakash Thathera v. State of U. P.

2009-12-23

RAVINDRA SINGH

body2009
JUDGMENT: Ravindra Singh, J. This bail application has been filed by Om Prakash Thathera with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 1577 of 2008 under sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504, 506 , 326 I.P.C. and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act., Police Station Pipiganj, District Gorakhpur. Heard Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record. 2. The facts, in brief, of this case are that the FIR has been lodged by Mahajan Prasad on 25.7.2008 on 1.35 p.m. in respect of the incident which has allegedly occurred on 24.7.2008 at 7.00 p.m. It is alleged that the marriage of the deceased Smt. Shila Devi was solemnized on 1.7.2007 with the applicant. After marriage the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the applicant and other co-accused to fulfil the demand of dowry as of coloured T.V., Motor Cycle, 5 bhar gold and Rs. 50,000/- . In the meantime, the applicant had gone to somewhere else , thereafter the deceased was more harassed , it was told by the deceased to the applicant then he was found by him by saying that his family members were saying correctly and she was told till the demand of dowry is not fulfilled, she will not be sent to her parents house. On 12.7.2008, the deceased gave a telephonic massage calling her father or uncle in her rescue because she was subjected to cruelty, after receiving such massage, the first informant tried to persuade the father- in- law of the deceased and deceased was told by her father to keep patience because she was pregnant also. On 24.7.2008 at about 1.00 p.m., the first informant got an information on his telephone that the deceased was burnt by her in-laws and she was taken to the Medical Hospital Gorakhpur. The first informant and his family members came to the District Hospital, Gorakhpur and saw that the deceased was badly burnt condition, she was struggling for her life. Her child had died in her womb. The FIR was lodged under section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, thereafter the deceased died, therefore, the offence under section 304-B I.P.C. was also added. Her child had died in her womb. The FIR was lodged under section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, thereafter the deceased died, therefore, the offence under section 304-B I.P.C. was also added. The post mortem examination was done on 31.7.2008 at 3.20 p.m. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased has sustained superficial to deep septic burn all over the body from head to sole as ante mortem injury. The cause of death was due to septic shock as a result of ante mortem burn injury. The applicant applied for bail before the Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur, who rejected the same on 30.4.2009. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that even according to the FIR, the applicant has gone from his house, thereafter she was subjected to cruelty by her in-laws, the allegation in respect of demand of dowry and subjecting the deceased to the cruelty is absolutely false and base less. The statement of the deceased was recorded by the I.O. under section 161 Cr.P.C.,who stated that her husband ( applicant ) had gone to Bombay to earn livelihood on 3.7.2008, she was subjected to cruelty by her mother- in- law, Dewar Vikky, Nanand Shila Devi to fulfil the demand of dowry, she was having seven months' old child in her womb who was also died because her dewar Vikky kicked her womb, she also stated that her husband and father- in- law were not saying any thing, on 23.7.2008 she was beaten by her dewar and opened the pipe of gas in the kitchen and 4 liters kerosene oil were poured upon her, thereafter, the ignition was made by matchstick, she had not made any allegation against the applicant, there is specific allegation against co-accused Vikky, Dewar of the deceased, even the applicant was not present at his house at the time of alleged incident. The applicant is not having criminal antecedent, he is in jail since 10.8.2008. co-accused Shila Devi has been released on bail by another bench of this court on 25.3.2009 in criminal misc. bail application no. 29129 of 2008. 4. In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A.that marriage of the deceased was solemnized on 1.7.2007, thereafter the demand of dowry has been made for which the deceased was subjected to cruelty. bail application no. 29129 of 2008. 4. In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A.that marriage of the deceased was solemnized on 1.7.2007, thereafter the demand of dowry has been made for which the deceased was subjected to cruelty. According to FIR, the applicant was also justified the demand of dowry, thereafter the deceased was put on fire on 24.7.2008 though there is specific allegation against co-accused Vikky, the dewar of the deceased, according to the statement of the deceased recorded by the I.O. that she was beaten by him, thereafter the pipe of the gas was opened in the kitchen and kerosene oil was poured upon her and ignition was made by matchstick. The deceased had sustained superficial burn injury all over the body from head to sole, the applicant, being husband of the deceased, may not be released on bail because he was under obligation to protect the life of the deceased and not to make the demand of dowry, therefore, he may not be released on bail. 5. Considering the facts, circumstances of the case and submission made by learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., the allegation is that marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant on 1.7.2007, the demand of coloured T.V., Motor Cycle,Gold and Rs. 50,000/- was made by the applicant and other co-accused persons for which the deceased was subjected to cruelty, ultimately, she was set on fire though according to the statement of the deceased recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. by the I.O. the specific allegation has been made against co-accused Vikky, the dewar of the deceased, who kicked the womb of the deceased as a result of which the child died in her womb, the gas pipe was opened by him in the kitchen, thereafter pouring the kerosene oil upon her, she was set on fire but the applicant being the husband of the deceased who was under obligation to protect the life of his wife has failed to discharge his legal and social obligation and was party to the demand of dowry is not entitled for bail, the prayer for bail is refused. Accordingly, this application is rejected.