Allahabad High Court
Chutaila 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. - 29730 of 2022
Applicant :- Chutaila
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Brijesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Chutalia, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 32 of 2022, under Sections 498-A,304-B,323,506 IPC and section 3/4 D.P.Act Police Station Khajuriya, District- Rampur, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation of causing the death of her daughter-in-law against the applicant.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained. Viscera was preserved. On the body of the deceased no mark of injury was found.Doctor has stated that there is no requirement of further investigation of the heart of the victim.The deceased died natural death.Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case.The applicant is in jail since 16.4.2022 and has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
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 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.
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
6. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 20.10.2022
Atul kr. sri.
