HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 39 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17234 of 2015 Applicant :- Jungali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased and the marriage of the deceased and son of the applicant was solemnized in the year 2008. He submits that Amar, the husband of the deceased in jail. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated at bar that the husband of the deceased is in jail. It is further contended that there is no dying declaration against the applicant or eye witness account of the incident. The applicant is in jail since 5.1.2015.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail .
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Jungali involved in Case Crime No. 436 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S.-Piraich, District Gorakhpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The case of the applicant is distinguished from the case of the husband of the deceased namely Amar.
It is made clear that if the husband of the deceased has not been confined in jail as stated by learned counsel for the applicant, the present order shall not be given effect to and the applicant shall not be released on bail.
Order Date :- 1.6.2015 Ashish Pd.