Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 2 January, 2023
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36990 of 2021
Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Naresh Singh,Shive Datta Yadav
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shailendra Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in S.T. No.876 of 2020, Case Crime No.117 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Malwan, District- Fatehpur, during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 12/13.07.2020 when the deceased was alone in the room, she committed suicide by hanging herself and when applicant came to know, he tried to save the deceased but she already died and due that reason applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant never demanded anything from the deceased and he never tortured her for demand of dowry. Learned counsel for the applicant next argued that F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of false and frivolous fact. Learned counsel for the applicant very fairly submits that during the course of investigation, P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 turned hostile. It is next submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 02.09.2020 and in case, he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has 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 coupled with the fact that P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 turned hostile 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- Shailendra Kumar 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 :- 2.1.2023
Sachin/-
