Allahabad High Court
Mukuldeep @ Mukandeep vs State Of U.P. on 12 May, 2023
Bench: Mayank Kumar Jain
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:103826
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21302 of 2023
Applicant :- Mukuldeep @ Mukandeep
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Nagendra Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 0279 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case being the husband of the deceased-Sita. The marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the present applicant prior to three years of the incident. The deceased-Sita had committed suicide. It is further contended that during inquest proceedings the informant and his son Anil were present and did not raise any suspicion about the death of the deceased. In the postmortem report, except ligature mark there was no other injury found on the body of the deceased. The cause of death was ascertained as asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. It is further contended that during trial statement of P.W.1-Prempal has been recorded and he denied the allegation of demand of additional and cruelty against the applicant. The informant corroborated his version that last rites of his daughter Sita was performed in his presence. His daughter was mentally ill and her treatment was going on. Learned counsel for applicant lastly submits that applicant is in jail since 19.07.2021 having no criminal history and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.
In Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that:-
"15. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India SCC para-15 it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, the Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail."
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant, Mukuldeep @ Mukandeep, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.
(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.
(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(4). 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.
Order Date :- 12.5.2023
Prajapati
