Allahabad High Court
Shivam vs State Of U.P. on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42234 of 2022
Applicant :- Shivam
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh,Syed Wajid Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pranat Pal Tripathi,Shivesh Mishra
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Shivesh Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shivam, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 298 of 2021, under Sections 498-A,304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act Police Station Baradari, District- Bareilly, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife by way of hanging. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of false implication. The deceased committed suicide because of depression .She has entered into love marriage with applicant.The family members of her parental did not liked her marriage.She suffered from leprosy too. Deceased committed suicide on account of the aforesaid reasons by way of hanging. The minor injuries appear to be caused after the dead body of the deceased was taken down. The applicant is in jail since 2.5.2021 and has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that deceased was beaten by family members of her matrimonial home. Her cries could not be heard loud due to sound of D.J.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Learned counsel for the applicant rejoined and submitted that cause of death of the deceased is not beating but due to asphyxia as a result of hanging .
After considering the rival contentions of the parties, it appears that witnesses of fact have been examined. Only formal witnesses are required to be examined. There is no apprehension of tampering with the witnesses.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping 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 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; 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.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 13.2.2023
Atul kr. sri.
