Allahabad High Court
Vivek Singh vs State Of U.P. on 6 February, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17915 of 2022
Applicant :- Vivek Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Karunesh Pratap Singh,Amit Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vivek Singh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 220 under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Basgaon, District- Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the FIR that daughter of the informant was married with the applicant on 30.11.2020. There was further demand of Rs. 5 lakhs for establishing the business for the applicant and on account of non-fulfillment of the aforesaid demand, the deceased was strangulated and hanged to death.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the money was being demanded by the applicant to establish his business so that he may not go out for doing job. He has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Appasaheb and another Vs. State of Maharastra, (2007) 9 Supreme Court Cases 721, wherein the Apex Court has stated that the demand of money on account of some financial stringency or for meeting some urgent domestic expenses cannot be considered to be demand of dowry. He has finally submitted that in the post mortem report of the deceased only two abrasions have been found on the neck of the deceased and no ligature marks have been found. He has submitted that as per the Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology of MODI, if the ligature used is soft like stocking or scarve and it is moved soon after the death, ligature mark may not be visible but abrasions may be visible. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 18.07.2021. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-
(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, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 6.2.2023
Abhishek
