Allahabad High Court
Smt. Krishna vs State Of U.P. on 19 May, 2023
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:109712
Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59124 of 2022
Applicant :- Smt. Krishna
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
This is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4675 of 2020 has been rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Samit Gopal, vide order dated 05.02.2020.
Vide order dated 27.04.2022 passed by Hon'ble The Chief Justice, bail applications which are filed subsequent to such bail applications, which were decided two years before shall be listed as per the roster before regular Court dealing with the matter. Accordingly the instant bail application is before this Court.
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, Smt. Krishna, with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2018, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Bahjoi, District- Sambhal, during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is the sister-in-law (Jethani) of the deceased. The applicant never demanded dowry or did he torture the deceased. In fact, the applicant never interfered in the domestic life of the deceased and her husband. The applicant is bereaved by the death of her sister-in-law and prays for peace of the departed soul. However, for the purpose of the bail application, it is submitted that the deceased was a temperamental lady who was prone to extreme reactions even on trivial issues. On the fateful day apparently after minor disagreement with her husband, the deceased committed suicide in a fit of rage by burning herself.The applicant did not abet or instigate the deceased to commit the suicide.The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who has cooperated with the police investigation and shall join the trial proceeding. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. He lastly submits that the brother-in-law (Jeth) namely Mahesh who has been similar role as assigned to the applicant has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 20.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. IInd Bail Application No. 11735 of 2022, copy of which has been produced before this Court and is taken on record. The applicant is in jail since 20.03.2023.
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 she will misuse the liberty of bail.
Regarding long incarceration of under trials prisoners in jail due to delay in conclusion of trial, the Hon'ble Apex Court in re: Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 has held in Para 16 of the judgment being reproduced herein below as follows :-
"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 Representing Undertrial Prisoners v. Union of India, 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, 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."
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 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; 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-Smt. Krishna 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.
Order Date :- 19.5.2023
S.Ali
