Jeetu vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 27765 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195100
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36137 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Jeetu
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

1. Heard Mr. Manvendra Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

2. Perused the record.

3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Jeetu, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 88 of 2022, under Sections 306, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Jafarganj, District-Fatehpur during the pendency of trial.

4. Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 05.08.2022, a delayed FIR dated 11.08.2022 was lodged by first informant-Shyambabu (father of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 88 of 2022, under Sections 306, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Jafarganj, District-Fatehpur. In the aforesaid FIR, 5 persons namely - (1) Jeetu (applicant herein), (2) Krishna, (3) Shyampati, (4) Archana and (5) Pyari have been nominated as named accused.

5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the FIR to the effect that applicant and the prosecutrix were in love affair with each other. Subsequently, conciliation proceedings were held at the behest of the elders and well-wishers of the family. A consensus was thus arrived at between the parties that applicant shall marry with the prosecutrix. However, the FIR further records that demand of dowry was raised on behalf of applicant and other accused as a consequence of above, the marriage of the parties could not be solemnized and the prosecutrix committed suicide by hanging herself.

6. Learned counsel for applicant submits that though applicant is a named/charge sheeted accused inasmuch as, the charge sheet has been submitted against applicant on 02.11.2022 whereas the other accused were exculpated yet the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. An offence under Section 306 IPC has to be considered on a conjoint reading of the provisions contained in Sections 107 and 306 IPC. Moreover, an offence under Section 306 IPC is subject to trial evidence. However, up to this stage, from the material collected by the Investigating Officer, it can not be conclusively concluded that applicant has abetted, instigated or conspired in the commission of the crime in question. There is nothing on record on the basis of which, it can be inferred that the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of applicant. To buttress his submission, he has relied upon the following judgments of this Court and the Supreme Court in (i). Sarvesh Vs. State of U.P. 2018 ADJ Online 0163, (ii). Kanchan Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2021 SCC OnLine SC 737, (iii). Mirza Iqbal alias Golu and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1251, (iv) Mariano Anto Bruno and Another Vs. Inspector of Police 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1387 and (v) Kashibai and Others Vs. State of Karnataka, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 575.

7. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as, he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 05.09.2022. As such, he has undergone more than 1 year of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized. However, up to this stage, no such incriminating circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant during the pendency of trial. On the above premise, he submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.

8. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.

9. Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made, complicity of accused and coupled with the fact that up to this stage from the material collected by the Investigating Officer, it can not be definitely concluded tht the applicant has abetted, instigated or conspired in the commission of the crime in question, there is nothing on record on the basis of which, it can be definitely concluded that the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of applicant, no instigation can be inferred against the applicant from his conduct either, an offence under Section 306 IPC is subject to trial evidence, the judgment of this Court as well as the Supreme Court referred to above, the allegation made in the FIR regarding the demand of dowry are vague and bald allegation being devoid of material paticulars, the said allegation has not been evidenced by material particulars in the statement of the first informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized, yet in spite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, therefore, irrespective of the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to the present application for bail, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.

10. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant-Jeetu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

12. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

Order Date :- 10.10.2023

Vinay