Malkeet Singh vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 26737 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189223
 
Court No. - 64
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40356 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Malkeet Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Raghuvansh Misra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Pandey,Vijeta Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

1. Heard Sri Raghuvansh Misra, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Vijeta Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

2. Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A is taken on record.

3. There is allegation against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife within 7 years of his marriage with the deceased.

4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased was a short tempered lady and used to quarrel in her matrimonial home. On 08.04.2023 she committed suicide by way of hanging and it is admitted in the FIR that the applicant made a phone call on 07:30 p.m to the informant informing about the incident. Thereafter, the informant along with her brother came to his house and FIR was lodged by her on the next day at 13:28 hours falsely implicating the applicant. He has submitted that the applicant was generally implicated along with his other family members. Apart from ligature mark around the neck, there was no other injury found on the person of the deceased. She committed suicide by way of hanging since her hyoid bone was intact. The deceased bolted the door from inside and committed suicide. The door was brokened by applicant with the help of a tractor. The brother of the deceased, Saheldeep, claimed that he was present in the house when the deceased was allegedly done to death. He stated that the deceased asked the applicant to bring some food articles and thereafter the applicant taunted her for bringing inadequate dowry in marriage. Fight aggravated between them and the deceased went inside the room after bolting the door from inside she committed suicide. The applicant did not tried to save her. He has further submitted that the cause of incident were the heated arguments between the couple and not any subjection of deceased to cruelty on account of unfulfilled demand of dowry. He has submitted that Saheldeep, brother of the deceased, was neither named in the FIR by his mother nor made witness of inquest nor his statement was promptly recorded. FIR was lodged on 09.04.2023 but his statement was recorded only on 07.05.2023 by the investigating officer.

5. Counsel for the applicant has finally submitted that the mother of the deceased had married twice. The brother of the deceased, Saheldeep, was born to the informant from second marriage and he was living in the family of the applicant because his in-laws were not having means to bring him up. The applicant has no criminal to his credit and is in jail since 21.04.2023.

6. Counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal vs. Orilal Jaiswal and Another, (1994) 1 SCC 73, wherein the Apex Court held that requirement of proof beyond all reasonable doubts is not altered even after introduction of Section 498-A IPC and Section 113-A of the Evidence Act. Before recording the finding of guilt against an accused the Court must satisfy itself that the deceased was not hyper sensitive. He has submitted that in the present case that the deceased was hyper sensitive and only because the applicant did not complied to her demand of bringing food articles at once and made some hurtful remarks, she committed suicide by way of hanging.

7. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that there are specific allegation against the applicant of subjecting the deceased to cruelty and demanding dowry. He mentally tortured and harassed her for not bringing adequate dowry. There is presumption against the applicant under Section 106 and 113-B IPC of the Evidence Act. Hence, the applicant does not deserves to be enlarged on bail.

8. On the other hand learned A.G.A has also opposed the prayer for bail.

9. After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that the presumption under Section 106 IPC and 113-B of the Evidence Act is rebuttable. In the present case, it is clear from the statement of the brother of the deceased, Saheldeep, that prior to the alleged unfortunate incident the couple had a quarrel and some harsh words were uttered by the applicant in the fit of anger, thereafter, the deceased went inside the room and after bolting the door from inside she hanged herself to death. The presence of Sahaldeep in the matrimonial home of his deceased sister proves that the informant was unable to look about her son and he was living in the matrimonial home of his sister. In his statement, he has not given any instance of the deceased being subjected to cruelty by the applicant prior to the present incident and that soon before her death the deceased was subjected to any cruelty. The applicant does not appears to have any criminal antecedents.

10. 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 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.

11. Let the applicant, Malkeet Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 157 of 2023, under Sections- 304-B, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Madnapur, District- Shahjahanpur, 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.

(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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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.

12. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

13. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Order Date :- 3.10.2023

Rohit