Allahabad High Court
Satpal vs State Of U.P. on 19 October, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30168 of 2022
Applicant :- Satpal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Malik,Onkar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.
2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.42 of 2022 under Sections 147, 302, 201, 328 I.P.C., P.S. Sikheda, District Muzaffarnagar.
3. As per contents of first information report, sister of informant was married to the son of applicant 12 years prior to the incident. Applicant is the father in law of the deceased and as per allegations made in the F.I.R., the incident took place on 22.03.2022 at about 12:00 night when the informant was provided information that the deceased had consumed some poisonous substance and was being taken to hospital by her husband and other family members. It is averred that subsequently she passed away and was cremated by applicant and co-accused without even waiting for the family of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that 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 marriage between the deceased and son of applicant had taken place 12 years' prior to the incident. It is further submitted that the story set up in the F.I.R. that the deceased was cremated without waiting for her family members, is patently incorrect as per statement of Mamta, who is sister of deceased, who has clearly stated that she was provided information regarding illness of deceased, by husband of the deceased, i.e. applicant's son. It is also stated that upon receiving information, she reached the house of the deceased and found that the deceased had been taken to hospital. It is thus submitted that the family members of the deceased were very much present at the time of cremation without any murmur being raised regarding any untoward incident happened to the deceased. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 24.03.2022 and as yet only charge sheet has been filed.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application with submission that the informant has clearly supported the prosecution version in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
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 submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that the applicant is father in law of the deceased and the marriage between his son and the deceased had taken place 12 years prior to the incident. Although the F.I.R. states that the deceased was cremated without even waiting for her family members to reach the spot but the same does not appear to be corroborated by the statement of sister of deceased, Smt. Mamta in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; the applicant is in jail since 24.03.2022 and as yet trial has not commenced, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
8. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
9. Let applicant Satpal, 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 :- 19.10.2022
kvg/-
