Allahabad High Court
Naveen Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 4 January, 2021
Bench: Umesh Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48492 of 2020
Applicant :- Naveen Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shivendra Raj Singhal,Dharmendra Singhal(Senior Adv.)
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant- Naveen Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 286 of 2020, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station- Gandhi Park, District- Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case; that the applicant is the husband of the deceased; that prosecution allegations in brief are that, an FIR was lodged by Praveen Kumar (First Informant) on 28.07.2020 at 12.25 a.m. against the applicant alleging therein that the daughter of the first informant namely Kumud Singh was married with the applicant on 10th October, 2010 and the said marriage was a love marriage, after which, the applicant started harassing the deceased in the garb of demand of money as she was an earning woman. It is further alleged that the first informant has even requested the applicant to send his deceased daughter to his home but, the applicant has replied that she will reach her parental home only when she is dead. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the inquest on the body of the deceased was performed on 27.07.2020 in which, the first informant was nominated as Panchayatnama Witness and at the said instance, it was categorically mentioned in the inquest that the deceased has committed suicide and there is no demand of any dowry is alleged in the FIR. In the dying declaration, which is annexed as annexure no. 11 of the affidavit, the deceased has clearly written that no one is responsible for her death. In the statement of the daughter of the applicant and deceased namely Tripti, which is recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has stated that the deceased was suffering from fever and went to the bathroom where she slipped and suffered injury after which the applicant brought the deceased from the bathroom and applied ointment on her injury, subsequently the deceased went to office and the daughter of the deceased went to room of her paternal aunt (Bua). It is further stated that on the next day the employee of the bank knocked the door after which the applicant and the witnesses stood up and the applicant has shouted the name of the witness and his sister, after which the said witness has seen her mother hanging from the roof. It has next submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that it has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments that, to bring home the charge of section 306 IPC, the prosecution has to demonstrate true facts and evidence that, the harassment or atrocities have been faced by the deceased were persistent or continuous. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 30.07.2020 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail
Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that deceased was committed suicide due to depression and harassement; that deceased was the Branch Manager of the bank and her husband was harassing her, hence prima facie case is made out against the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case in my opinion the accused applicant is entitled for bail.
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:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, shall cooperate in the investigation or trial and will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
2. In case of breach of any of the 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.
3. However, if due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Sub-ordinate Court is under lockdown, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused till furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts is restored.
4. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
5. 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.
It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.
Needless to note that any observation touching the merit of the case, if has come in this order that is only for the purpose of deciding this bail application and learned Court below will not be influenced in any way thereof while deciding the case finally.
Order Date :- 4.1.2021
SK Srivastava
