news details |
|
|
| Court reject bail in murder of husband and father-in-law | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Jan 30: Additional Sessions Judge Doda Amarjeet Singh Langeh today rejected the bail application of one Renu Devi who is facing trial in murder of her husband and father-in-law.
According to the police case that son of petitioner namely Mukesh Kumar lodged a written complaint on 24-10-2016 with Police Station Assar describing therein that Reenu Devi (who is petitioner herein) is his mother and she has illicit relations with one Om Parkash, who is also a co-accused and an undertrial in F.I.R No. 29/2016 sub-judice in this Court; that petitioner has illicit relations with Om Parkash for 10/11 years as on 24-10-2016; that his father (father of complainant) advised accused Om Parkash to desist from such act; that Om Parkash did not heed to said advice and instead started harboring animosity against father of complainant; that in the intervening night of 23-24th of October 2016, while father of complainant Sham Lal and his grandfather namely Santu Ram were sleeping at their residence, petitioner along with five co-accused barged into the house with intention to kill the father and grandfather of complainant and the duo was accordingly killed and their dead bodies were concealed which later were recovered from field of accused Om Parkash on the disclosure of petitioner etc. etc. On the set of aforesaid allegations, F.I.R No. 29/2016 for offences under section 302, 458, 449, 450, 149, 201, 34 of RPC was registered and investigation started. Finally, chargesheet was presented in the Court.
Additonal Sessions Judge Doda Amarjeet Singh Langeh after hearing both the sides observed that The nature of charge is a very vital factor alongside the punishment to which the party may be liable if convicted - while deciding a bail application. Similarly, the nature of evidence led in a criminal case is also very pertinent to be considered in deciding a bail application involving an alleged double murder. While exercising traditional reluctance to thoroughly appreciate the evidence led by prosecution till date in the case in hand, I am of the considered opinion that every relevant consideration in the matter in hand goes against petitioner in the application in hand at this stage. No fragility in the evidence of prosecution led till date could be traversed so as to allow application in hand. For all what is said hereinabove and having regard to the nature and character of evidence available on record, gravity of the charge and the punishment that an offence under section 302 of RPC carries, Court is of the considered opinion that application of petitioner has no merit at this stage and same is therefore dismissed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
