Ram Milan Pandey vs State of U.P

Ravindra Singh, J.—This application has been filed by the applicant Ram Milan Pandey with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 214 of 2005 u/s 304, I.P.C. P.S. Saini district Kaushambi.

The prosecution story in brief is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Rohit Kumar Pandey son of the applicant on 5.8.2005 at 00.45 a.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 31.7.2005. It is alleged that the applicant alongwith his wife deceased Smt. Asha Devi had gone from their house on 31.7.2005 at about 8.00 a.m. He had taken a gandasa wrapped in a lungi, but they did not come back to their house till night of that day then on the next day their search was made and the dead body of the deceased was found in a pond. Its information was given to the Police. Thereafter, the inquest report was prepared and the dead body was sent to mortuary. After conducting the post mortem examination and doing the cremation of the dead body the F.I.R. of the present case was lodged on 5.8.2005.

According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased had received seven ante mortem injuries in which injury Nos. 1 to 6 were incised wounds and injury No. 7 was contusion.

Heard Sri D. S. P. Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. There was no reason of committing the murder. The applicant and the deceased were having love affairs, subsequently, love affairs converted into marriage. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ill will of the first informant also. The applicant had constructed the house at the instance of the deceased in the village of her parents and he purchased agriculture land also. There was no motive to commit the murder and there was no direct evidence to show that the applicant has committed the murder but only on the basis of doubt and suspicion the applicant has been falsely implicated. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

In reply to the above contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased had gone from her house in the company of the applicant. The applicant was having gandasa. The F.I.R. has been lodged by the son of the applicant and during investigation the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of Jagat Patel who saw the alleged incident and at the pointing out of the applicant blood stained gandasa has been recovered by which the injuries were caused on the person of the deceased and the applicant has not come with some other version. The applicant was absconding after committing the alleged offence. There was no reason of his false implication. In case he is released on bail, he shall tamper with the evidence.

Considering the facts, circumstances of the case and the submission made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and considering the allegation that the applicant has committed the murder of his wife, gravity of the offence is too much and the applicant, the husband of the deceased, has not given any other version in respect of the murder of his wife and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail is refused.

Accordingly this application is rejected.