Allahabad High Court
Keshkali vs State Of U.P. on 20 December, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12553 of 2022
Applicant :- Keshkali
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
By means of supplementary affidavit, the applicant has filed affidavit of the applicant, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant- Keshkali with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 228 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Patiyali, District Kasganj,
As per prosecution story, the marriage of the daughter of the informant was solemnized with the son of the applicant Rahul Deep on 3.7.2020 as per Hindu Rites. The applicant who happens to be the mother-in-law of the deceased person and other accused persons are stated to have subjected her to cruelty leading her to commit suicide resulting in her dowry death on 30.12.2021 at about 05:20 AM.
It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant, who is mother in law of the deceased and is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about six months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. General allegation of demand of dowry and cruelty has been made against the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that no ingredients of Section 304-B IPC is fulfilled as there is no demand of dowry soon before her death. As per the medical report of the deceased person, she has expired out of septicemia as a result of injury sustained to her. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Co-accused-Hundi Lal , who is father in law and having similar role has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12524 of 2022 on 9.12.2022. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. . In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, she will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
In the event of arrest the applicant is arrested, he shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case for the aforesaid offences on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender passports, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. The passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that the applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. 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 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition 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.
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 20.12.2022
Anuj Singh
