- (1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. Heard Sri Somesh Khare and Sri Sharique Ahmad, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. for the State of U. P. and Sri Amit Daga, learned Counsel for the complainant.
(2.) THIS is second bail application moved by the applicant Smt. Ram Sumirini with a prayer that she may be released on bail in case crime No. 263 of 2006 under sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and section 3/4 D. P. Act, P. S. Barra, District Kanpur Nagar. The Criminal Misc. First Bail Application has been rejected by this Court on 9. 2. 2007 after considering the merits of the case. It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased, aged about 73 years. Her son Yogesh Chandra Agrawal was born on 1. 7. 1969 and her daughter Pratima was born on 13. 3. 1965. Trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future because only P. W. 1 has been examined. The applicant is in jail since 9. 10. 2006. The deceased herself committed suicide, she has not been murdered by any person because under frustration the deceased committed suicide by way of hanging prior to that she had tried to commit suicide by cutting the nerves of the hands when she did not get success, she hanged herself. At the time of disposal of the first bail application, the ground with regard to the old age of the applicant was not properly considered even there is no reference about her age in the order dated 9. 2. 2007. The applicant is old woman. She is having no criminal antecedent. There is no chance of her absconding and tempering with the evidence, therefore she may be released on bail. In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A. G. A. and learned Counsel for the complainant that ground of old age has already been considered at the time of the disposal of the first bail application because in the order dated 9. 2. 2007 passed by this Court, the contention made by learned Counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is old woman is clearly mentioned, it is not necessary that the ground in detail be mentioned in the order rejecting the bail application. All the grounds taken in the second bail application have already been considered, there is no new ground for releasing the applicant on bail and the trial is in progress, therefore, the applicant may not be released on bail.
(3.) CONSIDERING the facts, circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. , learned Counsel for the complainant and from the perusal of the record it appears that all the grounds taken in the second bail application have already been considered at the time of disposal of the first bail application, P. W. 1 has been examined by the Trial Court, the trial is in progress and there is no new ground for releasing the applicant on bail. The prayer for bail is refused. Accordingly this application is dismissed. Application Dismissed. .;