Allahabad High Court
Atul Kumar Srivastava @ Hariom vs State Of U.P. on 1 June, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 39
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19235 of 2015
Applicant :- Atul Kumar Srivastava @ Hariom
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Akhilesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Deo, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the marriage of the applicant with the deceased was solemnized four years ago. It is submitted that due to leakage of gas cylinder on account of which the deceased died after five days of the incident. A news item was also published in a daily newspaper 'Aaj' on 16.6.2014 and she was admitted by the applicant at G.S.V.M. Medical College, Kanpur Nagar. It is submitted that all the efforts have been made by the doctor to save the life of the deceased and Rs. 2.5 lacs have been expended by the applicant. It is further submitted that the deceased remained alive for about five days but no dying declaration nor her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded. It is also argued that there is no antemortem injury found on her person. The applicant is in jail since 1.7.2014 and has no criminal history.
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 Atul Kumar Srivastava @ Hariom involved in Case Crime No.562 of 2014, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S.-Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar 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.
Order Date :- 1.6.2015
Ashish Pd.
