Allahabad High Court
Daktar And Another 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. - 59627 of 2022
Applicant :- Daktar And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Choudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.429 of 2022, under Section 304 I.P.C., Police Station- Gulhariya, District- Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the incident is dated 11.7.2022. The husband of the first informant is said to have died on 12.7.2022 but the FIR has been lodged on 7.8.2022 after 25 days of the alleged incident against unknown persons. This delay has not been plausibly explained by the prosecution. It is only in the statement of the first informant under section 161 Cr.P.C., the names of the present applicants have been surfaced on the basis of suspicion. The deceased was thrashed and was given threats by the applicants on 9.7.2022 which has not been mentioned in the FIR. It is submitted by It is further submitted tat co-accused namely, Harnuni and Dalsingar have already been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46039 of 2022. It is next submitted that applicants have no criminal history and they are languishing in jail since 20.08.2022 and in case, they are enlarged on bail they will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants but he could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail.
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 co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail 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 applicants- Daktar and Ramu be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
5. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants 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/-
