Allahabad High Court
Sumit Singh @ Saurabh vs State Of U.P. on 20 October, 2022
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40501 of 2020
Applicant :- Sumit Singh @ Saurabh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bhavya Sahai,Sandeep Kumar Shrivastava,Saurabh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Brijesh Sahai, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Bhavya Sahai and Sri Saurabh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
First information report was lodged by the brother-in-law of the deceased that his sister-in-law was residing in a flat at Gautam Budh Nagar and was in touch with the applicant. He has come to know that his sister-in-law has died and her dead body may be handed over to the applicant for last rites and the cause of death of his sister-in-law may be investigated.
Learned Senior Advocate has submitted that during the period of spread of noval corona virus the sister-in-law of the informant died and the applicant was handed over her body for last rites, which was done by the applicant. The deceased died on account of throttling. It has come in the evidence that the applicant was having live-in-relation-ship with the deceased and thereafter he has been falsely implicated by the police. The applicant has been implicated on the basis of circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence against him. The motor-cycle of the deceased is alleged to have been recovered from the applicant, which was not strange since applicant was in relation-ship with the deceased. There were on talking terms. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in jail since 14.05.2020.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
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, Sumit Singh @ Saurabh, involved in Case Crime No.300 of 2020, under Section 302 I.P.C, Police Station Beeta-2, Greater Noida, District- Gautam Budh Nagar 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 one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 20.10.2022
SS
