Allahabad High Court
Sunny Alias Shashank Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27100 of 2019
Applicant :- Sunny Alias Shashank Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Sri Shashank Yadav, learned counsel filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the informant today, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashank Yadav, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sunny Alias Shashank Yadav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 354 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 307, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- South Firozabad, District- Forozabad, during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that due to non-fulfilment of additional dowry demand, the victim was harassed by her husband, father-in-law and two brothers-in-law. It is next submitted that as per the allegation in the F.I.R., on account of strained relations with her husband, the victim left her matrimonial home and resided at her parental place. On 11.06.2016, all the accused persons went to the parental place of the victim and finding her alone, her husband, brothers-in-law Sunni and Shaiky @ Antarix tried to strangulate her with dupatta. In the statement of the injured, the allegation of causing injury, on the instigation of father-in-law, is upon the husband and as well as other co-accused persons. During the course of investigation at various stages, different version have been given by the injured regarding the fact as to who has caused the injuries to the injured. Seeing the variations in the statements of the injured, it appears that the prosecution story is concocted and unbelievable. It has further been mentioned that the father-in-law as well as other brother-in-law Sunny have already been granted bail by the court below, therefore, the applicant is also liable to be enlarge on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.06.2019. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
JK Yadav
