Allahabad High Court
Rammilan vs State Of U.P. on 14 August, 2015
Bench: Karuna Nand Bajpayee
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34784 of 2013
Applicant :- Rammilan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Punit Kumar Gupta,Rafeek Ahmad Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
Perused the record.
Submission of counsel is that actually the wife of the applicant had committed suicide and the applicant had made full-fledged efforts to save her life and in the process of saving her life, the applicant had also incurred enormous burn injuries on his person. Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to annexure no. 1 to the IInd Supplementary Affidavit in which the photographs of the applicant are annexed showing extensive burn injuries on his body. It was further submitted that the applicant had remained admitted in the hospital since 5.6.2010 up to 20.6.2015 having 30 per cent burn injuries on his person. It has also been submitted that initially after investigation into the case final report was submitted but subsequently, on protest petition the final report was rejected and the applicant was summoned as an accused. Submission is that actually the applicant never indulged in any such kind of act as alleged nor ever subjected his wife to ill-treatment. Counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to the statement made under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of Smt. Puniya, the mother of the deceased, in which she also admitted that the deceased used to remain sick and in that connection the applicant had also taken due care of of her daughter and had got her medically treated. It was also submitted that during the course of trial the father of the deceased has been examined in the court in which he has completely denied the allegations levelled against the applicant and he has exonerated the applicant completely. Apart from this, another witness, the mother of the deceased has also been examined in the court but she, too, did not support the prosecution case. Lastly, it was emphasized by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.5.2013 and has already spent more than 2 years in jail having no criminal history. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant- Rammilan, involved in Case Crime No. 1348 of 2010, u/s 498A, 304B, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Kabrai, District- Mahoba, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-
(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 14.8.2015
Naresh
