Allahabad High Court
Siddha Gopal @ Kaptani vs State Of U.P. on 4 November, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41575 of 2022
Applicant :- Siddha Gopal @ Kaptani
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Karan Chaudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Dubey,Balendra Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State as well as learned counsel for informant and perused the record.
2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.182 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Lalauli, District Fatehpur.
3. The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased and as per contents of FIR, his son had entered into a wedlock with the informant's daughter on 22.04.2022 whereafter she was continuously harassed for dowry and upon its unfulfillment, was done to death on 17.07.2022.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him only on account of the fact that he is father-in-law of the deceased. It is submitted that in fact the deceased was in a love affair prior to the marriage which was solemnized against her wishes and was the cause of her committed suicide. It is submitted that the post-mortem report does not corroborate the allegations levelled against the applicant inasmuch as there are no external injuries on the body of deceased except for the ligature mark. It is submitted that the husband of deceased is already in jail while the applicant who is of advanced age has been incarcerated since 21.07.2022 with only charge-sheet having been filed.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and learned counsel for informant have opposed the bail application with the submission that death of daughter in law has taken place within a period of three months from the date of marriage in an unnaturally manner and as such presumption under section 113 of Evidence Act is required to be discharged by the applicant.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
7. Considering the submission advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it appears that the applicant is the father-in-law of deceased and although death has occasioned unnaturally within a period of three months, it has been submitted that the deceased in fact committed suicide since she has forcibly been married against her wishes. Post-mortem report also does not indicate any external injuries on the body of deceased except for the ligature mark. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history, is of advanced age and he is in jail since 21.07.2022 with only charge-sheet having yet been filed.
8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
9. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
10. Let applicant, Siddha Gopal @ Kaptani, involved in the aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) 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.
(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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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, 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.
Order Date :- 4.11.2022
Subodh/-
