Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2024) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 18932
Decided on: 05.02.2024
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Saket Sikri, Adv., Mr. Kshitij Mudgal, AOR, Mr. Vikalp Mudgal, Adv., Mr. Ajaypal Singh Kullar, Adv., Ms. Anshul Rajora, Adv.
For Respondent(s):
Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR, Ms. Alka Sinha, Adv.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302, 201, 120-B – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Murder of husband – Regular bail -- Petitioner was arrested on 01.04.2021 and is in custody since then -- Out of 13, 4 witnesses, who are private and vital witnesses, have been examined -- Taking into consideration the period already spent by the petitioner in custody, coupled with the fact that she is required to take care of her three minor children, however, without expressing any views on the merits of the case, bail granted.
(Para 4, 5)
ORDER
1. The petitioner seeks her enlargement on regular bail in FIR No.118/2021, dated 31.03.2021, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Chiluatal, District Gorakhpur. The deceased was the husband of the petitioner. There are three minor children born from the wedlock.
2. The deceased (Ajay Yadav) went missing from 21.03.2021. It is alleged that the petitioner gave an information on 23.03.2021 that her husband was missing. Search was conducted and the dead body of Ajay Yadav was found in Bangai jungle on 28.03.2021. The brother of the deceased – complainant lodged the FIR inter alia alleging that the petitioner was in illicit relationship with the co-accused Sunil Sahni, who was a tenant in the deceased’s house. The co-accused Sunil Sahni took the deceased on his motor cycle and thereafter, he was murdered in collusion with the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested on 01.04.2021 and is in custody since then.
3. The petitioner’s case, on the other hand, seems to be that she has been falsely implicated at the instance of her brother-in-law, who wants to grab the property of her husband.
4. It is not in dispute that after filing of the chargesheet, and pursuant to the time bound direction issued by the High Court, the trial has commenced. Learned State Counsel informs that out of 13, 4 witnesses, who are private and vital witnesses, have since been examined.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, and taking into consideration the period already spent by the petitioner in custody, coupled with the fact that she is required to take care of her three minor children, however, without expressing any views on the merits of the case, we are inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
6. The petitioner is, accordingly, directed to be released on bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
7. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
8. As a result, the pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.
Order accordingly.
********