VIKAS ALIAS BABLOO Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2009-7-106
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on July 29,2009

VIKAS ALIAS BABLOO Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Vijay Kumar Verma - (1.) HEARD Sri Sandeep Kumar Dubey, advocate, holding brief of Sri Gopal Misra counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Mullick, advocate appearing for the complainant and A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) THE applicant Vikas alias Babloo is the husband of Smt. Seema, who died within 7 years of her marriage. Her marriage with the applicant had taken place in March, 2003 and she died on 2.4.2007 in the house of the applicant. An F.I.R. was lodged by Raj Pal, father of the deceased, on 2.4.2007 at P.S. Saradhana (Meerut), where a case under Section 498A/304B, I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D. P. Act was registered against Vikas alias Babloo (applicant herein), Prakashi (mother-in-law), Kunwarpal (father-in-law) and Km. Komal (nanad). THE allegations made in the F.I.R., in brief, are that after marriage of the deceased with the applicant, she was being harassed by the accused persons making demand of dowry and when their demand was not fulfilled, they committed her murder on 2.4.2007 by throttling. The first and foremost submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that as per statements of the witnesses the main accused Kunwarpal, who had pressed the neck of deceased, has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.1.2008 passed in Bail Application No. 29089 of 2007 and hence, on the basis of principle of parity, the applicant deserve bail. Next submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging, for which the applicant cannot be held responsible, as he did not abet her to commit suicide.
(3.) IT is also submitted by learned counsel that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.2.2008 and hence, on the basis of long detention period in jail, he is entitled to be released on bail, because due to delay in trial, his fundamental right of speedy trial envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution is being violated. Bail application has been opposed by learned A.G.A. contending that the applicant also has actively participated in the commission of murder of the deceased and hence, in this heinous crime, he should not be released on bail.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.