Meher Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant Meher Singh, who is in judicial custody, in connection with Case Crime No. 69 of 2018, under Section 365, 304-B and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Shyampur, District Haridwar has sought his release on bail.

Heard Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the applicant, Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State and Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the complainant.

Learned counsel for the applicant would argue that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case; he has no role; he is not the family member; he is the uncle of the husband of the deceased. The deceased has not been identified as such. D.N.A profiling has yet not been done. The dead body recovered after a long and once he also intervened between the parties to settle the dispute. Hence, it is a case fit for bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the first informant would argue that the applicant is also instrumental. The deceased was missing since April, 2018 but, they have not informed to the police; when the dead body was recovered, they refused to identify it. The first informant has named the applicant as a person, who harassed the deceased for the demand of dowry. The FIR was lodged but the police did not take any action and it was only after the intervention of the High Court, investigation was carried out.

The applicant has been named by the first informant.

Learned State counsel would also argue that according to the first informant, the applicant is the person, who has also harassed the deceased.

The first informant is interrogated by the police at many stages of the investigation. At one stage, along with other person, he also named the applicant, as a person who has killed his sister but in one of the statement the first informant has been categorical in saying as to who has harassed the deceased and then states that once the matter was settled in Mandawali Thana, Bijnor, where the applicant was also present. From the perusal of the compromise deed, which is on record, it appears as if the applicant is not the party to the compromise though he appears to be a witness to it.

The applicant is not the family member of the deceased. In the instant case on 21.04.2018, the first informant informs the Police about the missing of his sister and it is not the husband of the deceased who informed the police.

Having considered the submission, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case and under the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, namely, Meher Singh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Any observation made by this Court is only for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and the same shall not be taken into consideration at all in any other proceedings.