4 Dec 2022 8:47 AM GMT
The Allahabad High Court recently granted to a man who has been accused of killing his wife as she could not prepare food due to the non-availability of vegetables. Taking into account the dying declaration of the deceased, the bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav noted that there was no premeditation for the applicant--husband to commit the offence as alleged against him."Perusal...
The Allahabad High Court recently granted to a man who has been accused of killing his wife as she could not prepare food due to the non-availability of vegetables.
Taking into account the dying declaration of the deceased, the bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav noted that there was no premeditation for the applicant--husband to commit the offence as alleged against him.
"Perusal of the dying declaration of the deceased clearly shows that on the date of the alleged incident i.e. on 25.07.2013 at noon, when the deceased could not prepare the food due to the non-availability of vegetables for which her husband lost his temper and started beating and poured kerosene oil upon her and burned. It means that there was no premeditation for the applicant to commit such offence as alleged against him.
The case in brief
The FIR in the case was lodged by the informant/complainant, the father of the deceased, alleging that his daughter was married to the applicant/accused Ganesh and in the said marriage, sufficient dowry was given, but her soninlaw (applicant) and his family members were not happy with the dowry given to them.
It is further alleged that when the daughter of the informant went to the house of the applicant, she was tortured and harassed by the applicant and his family members and she was also beaten by the accused persons and was pressurized to bring Rs.2 lakhs from her parents and when the said demand was not fulfilled, the applicant and other coaccused persons abused and threatened to kill his daughter by burning.
Ultimately, on July 25, 2013, the informant received a telephonic call from Sasural of his daughter that his daughter had been burnt. The informant/complainant reached the hospital and when he asked his daughter about the incident, she told that she had been burnt by her husband and his family members by pouring kerosene oil upon her. She died on August 1, 2013.
The accused/husband of the deceased was booked under Sections 498A, 302, 326, 323, 504, and 506 IPC and was arrested on August 4, 2013. The first bail plea of the accused was rejected in 2019, now the accused moved the instant second bail plea.
It was argued by him that the maximum this case can travel up to the limits of offence under Section 304 Part II IPC because the deceased died after 8 days of the alleged incident due to septic shock and maximum punishment for the offence under Section 304 Part II of IPC is 10 years.
The further contention was that the applicant is languishing in jail since August 2013 having no previous criminal history and he has already served more than 9 and ½ years in jail, hence, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Having considered the overall facts and circumstances, the Court noted that it was an admitted fact that the deceased was admitted to the hospital and remained under treatment in the hospital for 8 days before she died.
Therefore, the Court concluded that it was established that during the aforesaid period of 8 days, the injuries aggravated and worsened, as a result, she died due to septic shock.
Consequently considering the nature of the allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, and the submission of the counsel for the parties, the Court observed that it was a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed.
Case title - Ganesh v. State of UP [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 3162 of 2021]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 515
Click Here To Read/Download Order