Allahabad High Court
Vipin Chauhan vs State Of U.P. on 16 May, 2022
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44606 of 2021
Applicant :- Vipin Chauhan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Prakash,Digvijay Singh,Narayan Singh(Kushwaha),Sudhir Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajeev Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.564 of 2021, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Etah is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the present FIR was got registered by one Manoj Singh on 27.06.2021 for the incident said to have taken place on 24.06.2021 against Vipin Chauhan, Mohar Pal Singh and one unknown person with the allegation that informant's sister got married about ten years back with Vipin Chauhan. During this period, couple were blessed with three kids. Unfortunately, the applicant developed illicit relationship with the lady residing in a neighbourhood. When the informant's sister came to know about such type of relationship, she started opposing it. The applicant kept on maintaining the relationship with the lady and at last, left with no other option, wife of the applicant committed suicide by hanging herself. Except the ligature mark, there is no other mark of injury over her person. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of K.V. Prakash Babu vs State Of Karnataka reported in, 2016 (4) Crimes 184 (SC) that would not fall within the four corners of Section 306 IPC. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.07.2021.
Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
Taking into account the sole reason for commission of suicide i.e. extra-marital relationship of the applicant with some other lady, it is not enough to fall within the four corners of Section 306 IPC. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant, Vipin Chauhan, who is involved in the aforesaid case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS 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 HIM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. 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 :- 16.5.2022
Sumit S
