Komal Singh vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 20357 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:156335
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30816 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Komal Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

1. Heard Mr. Satendra Singh, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Saurabh Dwivedi, the learned counsel representing first informant.

2. Perused the record.

3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Komal Singh, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 181 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Sikandra, District-Agra during the pendency of trial.

4. Record shows that marriage of Ravi (Son of applicant) was solemnized with Soniya on 08.03.2018 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. Unfortunately, after expiry of a period of 5 years from the date of marriage of the son of applicant, an unfortunate accident occurred on 12.03.2023 in which, Soniya (daughter-in-law of the applicant) died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The information regarding aforesaid incident at the concerned Police Station was not given by applicant or any of his family members but by one Suraj (brother of the deceased/first informant).

5. On the aforesaid information, the inquest (Panchayatnama) of the body of the deceased was conducted on 12.03.2023. In the opinion of witnesses of inquest (Panch witnesses), the nature of the death of the deceased was characterized as suicidal.

6. It is apposite to mentioned here that after the inquest (Panchayatnama) proceedings of the body of the deceased was conducted, Suraj, brother of the deceased/first informant lodged an FIR dated 12.03.2023 which was registered as Case Crime No. 181 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Sikandra, District-Agra. In the aforesaid FIR, 4 persons namely - (1) Komal Singh (Father-in-law), (2) Smt. Rekha (Mother-in-Law), (3) Naresh (Devar) and (4) Ravi (Husband) have been nominated as named accused.

7. The gravamen of the allegations made in the FIR to the effect that the marriage of the sister of the first informant was solemnized with Ravi on 08.03.2018. Sufficient amount of goods and dowry were given at the time of marriage of the sister of the first informant but her in-laws were dissatisfied with the same. Additional demand of dowry to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- and a Swift Car was so made. In furtherance of the fulfillment of the additional demand of dowry, physical and mental cruelty is alleged to have been committed upon the sister of the first informant and ultimately she was put to death.

8. After above-mentioned FIR was lodged, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter-XII Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the postmortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 13.03.2023. In the opinion of Autopsy Surgeon, who conducted the autopsy of the body of deceased, the cause of death of the deceased was Asphyxia as a result of anti-mortem injuries. However, except for the ligature mark, the Autopsy Surgeon did not find any other anti-mortem injury on the body of the deceased. For ready reference, the anti-mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased are re-produced hereinunder:-

"AMI lignite mark

1. Ligature mark present all around neck size 23 x 2 cm exact below Rt. angle of ..... 5 cm area knot mark.

2. Ligature mark 5 cm below to Lt. Ear.

3. Ligature mark 4 cm below to chin.

4. Ligature mark 3 cm below Rt. Ear."

9. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. who have substantially supported the FIR. On the basis of above and other material collected by Investigating Officer during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that complicity of 3 of the named accused namely - (1) Komal Singh i.e. applicant herein, (2) Smt. Rekha and (3) Ravi is established in the crime in question. He, accordingly, submitted the charge sheet dated 19.05.2023 whereby 3 of the named accused mentioned above have been charge sheeted whereas another named accused Naresh (Devar) has been exculpated.

10. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased, a named as well as charge sheeted accused yet he is liable to be enlarged on bail. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken an extreme step of terminating her life by committing suicide. The occurrence in question has occurred after 5 years from the date of marriage of the son of the applicant. The bona-fide of the applicant is further explicit from the fact that except for the ligature mark, no other anti-mortem injuries was found on the body of the deceased. The allegations made in the FIR with regard to the additional demand of dowry to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/- and a Swift Car are bald and vague. No material particulars regarding the same have been mentioned in the FIR nor the same have been explained in the statement of the first informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He, therefore, contends that the said allegations are liable to be ignored by this Court at this stage. To buttress his submission, he has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, (2022) 6 SCC 599. The son of the applicant i.e. the husband of the deceased is already languishing in jail. Applicant cannot be said to the beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry.

11. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as, he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 29.04.2023. As such, he has undergone more than 3 months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized. However, up to this stage, no such incriminating circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant during the pendency of trial. He, therefore, contends that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.

12. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State and the learned counsel representing first informant have opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. The occurrence had taken place within 7 years of the marriage of the deceased and in the house of the applicant, therefore, by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 113B and 106 IPC of the Evidence Act, applicant is under burden not only to explain the manner of occurrence but also his innocence. However, the applicant has miserably failed to discharge this burden up to this stage. The deceased was a young lady who has died in unnatural circumstance. It is thus urged that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.

13. Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, Mr. Saurabh Dwivedi, the learned counsel representing first informant and upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made and complicity of accused coupled with the fact that the death of the deceased is prima-facie a suicidal death, except for the ligature mark, no other external or internal anti-mortem injury were found on the body of the deceased, the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, as such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized, in spite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 (Paragraph 5), the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, the allegations made in the FIR regarding demand of dowry and commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the deceased are vague and bald allegations inasmuch as, the same are devoid of material particulars, consequently, in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam (Supra), the same are liable to be ignored by this Court but without making any comments on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.

14. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

15. Let the applicant-Komal Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

16. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

Order Date :- 3.8.2023

Vinay