Allahabad High Court
Vijay Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 29 June, 2021
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- BAIL No. - 4841 of 2020
Applicant :- Vijay Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate through video conferencing in terms of orders issued by Hon'ble Chief Justice taking into consideration COVID-19 situation.
Present bail application has been filed by the accused/applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No.136 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Ghunghter, District Barabanki. From perusal of the first information report dated 26.11.2019, it comes out that the complainant had lodged a first information report against the applicant Vijay Kumar, who is said to be the husband of the deceased lady, contending that the applicant along with his parents has caused the death of the complainant's daughter on account of non-fulfillment of the dowry.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been roped in the entire episode simply being the husband of the deceased inasmuch as a perusal of the postmortem report, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-3 to the bail application, would indicate that there is no injury on the person of the deceased. He also contends that the applicant got treated the deceased at King Georges Medical University, Lucknow, for a long time on account of pregnancy and in this regard medical certificates have been annexed as Annexure-5 to the bail application. It is also contended that the applicant has unnecessarily been implicated in the instant offence and is languishing in jail since 28.11.2019.
On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the bail application.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records what is apparent is that the first information report has been lodged against the applicant and his parents on the ground of having caused the death of the daughter of the complainant on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry yet the postmortem report would indicate that no injury is found on the body of the deceased. Further, a perusal of the medical certificates, copies of which are Annexure-5 to the bail application, would indicate that the applicant was having the deceased treated at King Georges Medical University, Lucknow earlier on account of her pregnancy. Even otherwise, the applicant is in jail since 28.11.2019. Considering the aforesaid, the Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Vijay Kumar, involved in the aforesaid crime number 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(v) 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 CrPC (iv) argument / judgment.
(vi) 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.
(vii) Since the certified copy of this order, in view of the COVID-2019 pandemic, may not be easily available to the applicant, the applicant may file computer generated copy of this order from the official website of this Court and self- attested by the learned counsel for the applicant, before the concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/Official.
(viii) The concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/ Official, before accepting such computerized copy, filed by the applicant, as genuine, shall verify its authenticity from the official website of this Court.
(ix) Office is also directed to send a computerized copy of this order to the District Judge concerned through e-mail or the fax, as the case may be, forthwith.
It is provided that none of the observations made above shall be considered by the trial court and the trial shall proceed on its own merits.
Order Date :- 29.6.2021
A. Katiyar
