Allahabad High Court
Smt. Rani vs State Of U.P. on 10 August, 2021
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10091 of 2021
Applicant :- Smt. Rani
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Rai,Alok Kumar Mishra,Shyam Singh Somvanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Shyam Singh Somvanshi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Smt. Rani, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 500 of 2018, under Section 306 IPC, registered at P.S. Phase-2 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the allegation that the applicant was having some illicit relationship with one Pradeep who is said to be the friend of the brother of the applicant, is false and incorrect and even the allegation that the deceased had seen the applicant in compromising position many times, is also false and incorrect. It is argued that the deceased as per the prosecution case itself committed suicide and died. The deceased committed suicide at a distance place from the house. It is further argued that the allegations in the First Information Report do not make out under Sections 306 IPC and as the ingredients of Section 306 and 107 IPC are missing. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 16 of the affidavit and is in jail since 23.07.2020. It is argued that the applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that it is the applicant who is the main architect of the present case due to which the deceased committed suicide. The applicant was having illicit relationship with one Pradeep who was also living in the same house and was also caught a number of times by the deceased in compromising position which was the reason for the deceased to commit suicide. It is argued that as such the prayer for bail of the applicant be rejected.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is apparent that although the applicant is the wife of the deceased but the allegations in the present case do not constitute the ingredients of Section 306 and 107 IPC. The allegation is short of instigation as has been held in catena of judgments holding that different persons react differently in a situation, the same appears to be the case of the deceased who chose the commit suicide.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence 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 Smt. Rani, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 10.8.2021
M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.)
