Allahabad High Court
Nitanshu Gaur Alias Raja vs State Of U.P. on 23 April, 2019
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5645 of 2018
Appellant :- Nitanshu Gaur Alias Raja
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Tanisha Jahangir Monir
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
(Order on Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 01 of 2018).
Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
By judgement and order dated 01.8.2018 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Aligarh, the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 305 IPC, for ten years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.50,000/- as fine, in S.T. No. 32 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 664 of 2016, under section 305 IPC, P.S. Kwarsi, District Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has contended that in this case, victim was aged about 16 years and was living with her mother in A.D.A. Colony, Aligarh for the last 8 years. She was found dead in the mid night hanging by a sari with the sealing. A suicide note was also found in her pocket in which it was written that Nitanshu Gaur alias Raja is responsible for her death and he should be punished. The family members are not responsible and they should be said nothing. It was written in the FIR that after getting information of suicide, her father lodged FIR stating that his daughter has committed suicide being harassed and abetted by some wrongful act on the part of the accused-appellant. Subsequently, one more suicide note was discovered, photostat copy of which has been annexed in the counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant and it was a little detailed suicide note about which learned counsel for the accused-appellant has submitted that contents of subsequent suicide note has not been proved by any witness of prosecution. From perusal of statement of P.W.1-Sharmila, who is mother of victim, it appears that on 9.8.2016 when she was putting books of her daughter in order, she got the suicide note and same was given to the Investigating Officer. It has been stated by P.W.1-Sharmila that accused-appellant was harassing her daughter by calling her for sexual relationship and on being prevented by her daughter, he used to threat her saying that he will throw acid on her and he will kill her father and mother.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant further contended that if the threat was in the knowledge of parents of victim why they had not taken any action against accused-appellant. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the accused-appellant that P.W.2, who is father of the victim has also stated that accused-appellant used to harass his daughter in the like manner as stated by P.W.1, his wife. From the statement of P.W. 2 as pointed out by learned counsel for the accused-appellant, it is clear that relationship between P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 as husband and wife was not good and on the complaint of wife he had to live in jail for almost 18 months. She had lodged a case for harassment and for domestic violence and one case under section 307 IPC. It has also been contended that family of deceased-victim in terms of her parents were very much disturbed and there was no harmony between them.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant further contended that in defence, the accused-appellant himself examined as D.W.1 and stated about unusual relationship with one Mukesh Gautam and mother of the deceased. He has also stated that she requested him that she will live in other room so he may arrange any paying guest room. He has also stated that on many occasions, deceased victim on phone informed him about quarrelling of her mother with Mukesh Gautam.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has further contended that in addition to accused-appellant, one Shyam Babu Sharma-D.W.2 was also examined in defence about whom it has also come in prosecution case that he was the neighbour and mother of the deceased said to him about the wrong doing of accused-appellant, but D.W. 2-Shyam Babu Sharma has stated that on the date of incident both deceased and her mother were quarrelling. When he along with some other persons of locality went there and saw that the deceased was calling accused-appellant on phone and was requesting that please shift her to any other place otherwise she will be killed by them. It has also been contended that on the date of incident number of phone calls have been made by the deceased to the accused-appellant.
Moreover, during investigation accused-appellant was in jail for some time. The accused-appellant is languishing in jail since 01.8.2018. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that learned trial court has very rightly convicted and sentenced the accused appellant after appreciating evidence on record. The accused appellant has been found guilty of abetting a minor girl for committing suicide, hence he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, allegation against accused appellant only of abetting the deceased and also that there is no chance of early hearing of this appeal, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a case for bail during pendency of appeal.
Let the appellant-Nitanshu Gaur alias Raja convicted in Sessions Trial No. S.T. No. 32 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 664 of 2016, under section 305 IPC, P.S. Kwarsi, District Aligarh, be released on bail during pendency of appeal on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
So far as sentence of fine is concerned, on depositing 50% of fine, the remaining fine shall remain stayed during pendency of appeal. 50% fine shall be deposited within a month from receipt of this order.
As soon as personal bond and sureties are furnished, after keeping photostat copies of the same, original copies are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith from the trial court.
List the appeal for hearing in due course.
Order Date :- 23.4.2019
RCT/-
