Allahabad High Court
Lakshmi And Another vs State Of U.P. on 19 October, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:203314
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44003 of 2023
Applicant :- Lakshmi And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pathak,Chandra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
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 applicants, Lakshmi and Rahul, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 10/2023, under Sections 498-A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station - Barra, District- Kanpur Nagar, during pendency of trial.
There are allegations against the applicant of causing dowry death of deceased. The applicant No. 1, is mother-in-law of the deceased and applicant No. 2 is her husband.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that ingredients of constituting offence under Section 304 IPC is not made out since there is no evidence that soon before her death, deceased was subjected to any cruelty for demand of dowry. He has relied upon the judgments of Apex Court in the Case of State of M.P. Vs. Joginder and others(Criminal Appeal No. 190/2022); Vipin Jaiswal Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh; Appasaheb Vs. State of Maharashtra and another and Union of India Vs. Garware Nylons Ltd., AIR 1996 SC 3509 and Chemicals and Fibres of India Vs. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 558 and has submitted that demand of money from the side of groom to meet some urgent domestic expenses cannot be regarded as demand of dowry. In the present case, Rs. 1 lakh is alleged to have been demanded by the accused persons from the informant side in order to get some business established for the applicant No. 2. Deceased committed suicide after hearing the same. The applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. They have no criminal history to their credits and are languishing in jail since 10.01.2023.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants 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 on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of 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 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. & 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 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 applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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 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 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 :- 19.10.2023
Abhishek
