Allahabad High Court
Anil vs State Of U.P. on 19 October, 2022
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27544 of 2020
Applicant :- Anil
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gufran Ahmad Khan,Avanindra Kumar Mishra,Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),R.K. Singh. Rajput
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,R.P.S. Chauhan
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P.S. Chauhan learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife by way of hanging.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that direction was issued in the bail application of the co-accused to conclude the trial within a period of six months vide order dated 18.06.2020 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.35028 of 2019 but the same has not been concluded till date. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that only two prosecution witnesses have been examined. Applicant is in jail since 13.01.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit.
Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the informant, has vehemently opposed the bail application of the applicant and has submitted that as per his instructions nine witnesses have been examined out of 15 prosecution witnesses.
Learned AGA has also opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
After hearing rival contentions, this court finds that the trial of the applicant in spite of order of this court has not concluded. It appears that court is under some difficulty in conclusion of trial expeditiously. Keeping in view the long incarceration of the applicant in jail, he is entitled to be released on bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Anil, involved in Case Crime No.273 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Ughaiti, District- Budaun 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(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 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of two years from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 19.10.2022
SS
