Devki Nandan Pal vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 13322 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

Reserved :- 20/04/2023
 
Delivered :- 28/04/2023
 
Court No. - 76
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5702 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Devki Nandan Pal
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Karan Singh Yadav
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar,Ram Milan Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. Applicant - Devki Nandan Pal has approached this Court for bail in Case Crime No. 204 of 2022 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Barua Sagar, District- Jhansi.

2. Content of First Information Report of present case discloses that marriage of daughter of informant was solemnized with son of applicant, however her husband and in laws were not happy with dowry and committed cruelty with her in regard to demand of a four wheeler and within a period of one and half year, she died under other than normal circumstances. According to postmortem report, immediate cause of death was asphyxia due to ante mortem drowning and postmortem injuries were also seen. (post mortem animal bite present on left side on lower lip)

3. Sri Karan Singh Yadav, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that applicant is related to deceased as her father in law. Allegations of committing cruelty in regard to demand of dowry are not supported by any cogent evidence and it appears to be a vague allegation. The deceased went to Dumri river for taking bath and for washing cloth and it appears that an accident took place and she fell into river. Mother in law of deceased has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

4. Per Contra, Sri Markandey Singh, learned Brief Holder for State and Sri Ram Milan Singh, learned counsel for informant have submitted that deceased died within a short period of one and half years of marriage under other than normal circumstances. The applicant and other family member ran away and none of them was present during inquest proceedings. There are consistent evidence against applicant also in regard to demand of dowry. However, it is not disputed that similarly situated co-accused (mother in law) has already been granted bail. They have also submitted that order granting bail to co-accused by coordinate Bench was not accompanied with reasons as required in terms of judgments of Supreme Court in Manoj Kumar Khokhar vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (2022) 3 SCC 501 and Brijmani Devi vs. Pappu Kumar, (2022) 4 SCC 497.

5. LAW ON BAIL - A SUMMARY

(A) The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail.

(B) Power to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is of wide amplitude but not an unfettered discretion, which calls for exercise in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course or in whimsical manner.

(C) While passing an order on an application for grant of bail, there is no need to record elaborate details to give an impression that the case is one that would result in a conviction or, by contrast, in an acquittal. However, a Court cannot completely divorce its decision from material aspects of the case such as allegations made against accused; nature and gravity of accusation; having common object or intention; severity of punishment if allegations are proved beyond reasonable doubt and would result in a conviction; reasonable apprehension of witnesses being influenced by accused; tampering of evidence; character, behaviour, means, position and standing of accused; likelihood of offence being repeated; the frivolity in the case of prosecution; criminal antecedents of accused and a prima facie satisfaction of Court in support of charge against accused. The Court may also take note of participation or part of an unlawful assembly as well as that circumstantial evidence not being a ground to grant bail, if the evidence/ material collected establishes prima facie a complete chain of events. Parity may not be an only ground but remains a relevant factor for consideration of application for bail.

(D) Over crowding of jail and gross delay in disposal of cases when undertrials are forced to remain in jail (not due to their fault) may give rise to possible situations that may justify invocation of Article 21 of Constitution, may also be considered along with other factors.

(See, State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur vs. Balchand @ Baliay (AIR 1977 SC 2447 : 1978 SCR (1) 535; Gurcharan Singh vs. State (Delhi Administration), (1978) 1 SCC 118); State of U.P. vs. Amarmani Tripathi, (2005) 8 SCC 21; Prasanta Kumar Sarkar vs. Ashis Chatterjee and Anr (2010)14 SCC 496; Mahipal vs. Rajesh Kumar, (2020) 2 SCC 118; Ishwarji Mali vs. State of Gujarat and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 55; Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. The State of U.P. and others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 89; Ashim vs. National Investigation Agency (2022) 1 SCC 695; Ms. Y vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr :2022 SCC OnLine SC 458; Manoj Kumar Khokhar vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (2022)3 SCC 501; and, Deepak Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Anr. (2022)8 SCC 559)

6. In the present case, it transpires that daughter in law of applicant died under other than normal circumstances within a short period of one and half years of her marriage. According to postmortem report, immediate cause of Death was asphyxia due to ante mortem drowning and there was a sign of animal bite also. the co-ordinate Bench has granted bail to co-accused (mother in law of deceased), however, the reasons given there in may not be in terms of the judgements of Supreme Court in Manoj Kumar Khokhar and Brijmani Devi (supras) as well as that family members were not present during inquest.

7. Still there is merit in the argument of learned counsel for applicant that according to statement of witnesses, allegations of committing cruelty in regard to demand of dowry appear to be omnibus as well as that, at this stage it appears to be a case of dowry death and not a case of culpable homicide.

8. Therefore the applicant who is related as father-in-law of deceased as well as considering his age and taking note that there is huge overcrowding in jail, the applicant who is in jail since 30.09.2022 has made out a case for bail.

9. Let the applicant- Devki Nandan Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment or exemption from appearance on the date fixed in trial. 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 will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

(iv) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months after release of applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.

(v) Applicant has to appear on each and every date before learned trial Court and any application for exemption of his appearance on vague ground could be a ground for cancellation of bail by learned trial Court immediately.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of adjudicating the present bail application.

Order Date :- April 28, 2023

Nirmal Sinha

[Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.]