ZAFAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant by Sri K.K. Mishra, Advocate is taken on record.

(2.) Heard Sri K.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.Perused the record.

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and though the allegations of the witnesses are also against the applicant but as a fact of matter, he was not at all involved or contributory to the death of the deceased-wife. Further submission is that in fact it was the applicant who had rushed the injured wife to the hospital without loosing any time and had got her admitted in the hospital where she was given full treatment. Learned counsel for the applicant has also drawn attention of the Court towards the medical examination of Ruma in which the name of the applicant has been entered as the person who had brought the deceased to the hospital. Much emphasis has been laid by the learned counsel for the applicant on the dying declaration of the deceased in which she has categorically alleged that her three sister-in-laws, namely, Reshma, Amno and Shabana and the mother-in-law Hajra Begum had come in the room where she was at the time of incident and they had sprinkled kerosene oil on her person and then she was set ablaze. On being questioned as to where her husband was at the time of occurrence she had categorically replied that at that time her husband was out side the room and had come only after she had been set at fire. Further submission is that in view of the dying declaration the case of the applicant becomes distinguishable from the case of 4 accused who appear to be principal offenders in the case responsible for causing death of the deceased. Further submission is that subsequent conduct of the applicant in managing her medical treatment and taking her to the hospital is also compatible with his innocence and is wholly incompatible with his guilt. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 4.7.2014 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.