High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5868 of 2022 Applicant :- Munna Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Shiromani Shukla,Abhinav Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Mr. Anubhav Shukla, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. Instant bail application has been filed by applicant-Munna Lal seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.523 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 304B, 504 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Faridpur, District- Bareilly, during pendency of trial. 4. It transpires from record that marriage of Shiv Kumar son of present applicant was soliminized with Tulsa @ Ankita on 13.04.2021 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. However, just after expiry of a little more than four months from the date of marriage of son of applicant namely Shiv Kumar, an unfortunate incident occurred on 28.08.2021 in which Tulsa @ Ankita wife of Shiv Kumar died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. Information regarding aforesaid incident was not given by applicant or any of her family members at the concerned police station but by first informant-Chhote Lal, who is father of the deceased on 08.09.2021. Pursuant to aforesaid information, the inquest of the deceased was conducted on 29.08..2021. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the nature of death of the deceased was homicidal. Thereafter, post-mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 28.08.2021. In the opinion of autopsy surgeon, cause of death of deceased was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. However except for the ligature mark, Autopsy Surgeon did not find any external or internal ante- mortem injury on the body of deceased. 5. After expiry of a period of 12 days from the date of incident, first informant Chhote Lal lodged an F.I.R. dated 08.09.2021, which came to be registered as Crime No.523 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 304B, 504 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Faridpur, District-Bareilly. In the aforesaid F.I.R., five persons, namely, Shiv Kumar (husband), Munna Lal (father-in-law) i.e. applicant herein, Smt. Indrawati, (mother-in-law), Neeraj (Jeth) and Meena (Nanad) of deceased have been nominated as named accused. The Investigating Officer upon completion of the statutory investigation of aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. has submitted a charge-sheet dated 02.11.2021 wherey three of the named accused i.e. Shiv Kumar (husband) Munna Lal (father-in-law) i.e. applicant herein, Smt. Indrawati, (mother-in-law) have been charge-sheeted under Sections 498A, 304B, 504 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act whereas named accused Neeraj (Jeth) and Meena (Nanad) have been exculpated. On the query raised by the Court, as to what has happened subsequent to the submission of the charge-sheet dated 02.11.2021, learned counsel for applicant submits that case has not yet been committed to the Court of Sessions. 6. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is father -in-law of deceased but he is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime number. Applicant is a middle age man aged about 51 years. Applicant is in Jail since 28.10.2021. As such applicant has undergone more than three months of incarceration. Applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that the deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. Bonafide of applicant is explicit form the fact that except for the ligature mark, no other external or internal ante-mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. Allegations made in the F.I.R. regarding demand of additional dowry are only against the son of applicant, who is husband of deceased. Even otherwise present applicant cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry. Learned counsel for applicant then submits that there is delay of 12 days in lodging the F.I.R. but the delay in lodging the F.I.R. has not been unexplained in the F.I.R. itself nor in the statement of first informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Upto this stage, there is no evidence on record to suggest that applicant has even abetted in the commission of the alleged crime. The husband of the deceased is already languishing in jail. The mother-in-law of deceased i.e. wife of present applicant has already been enlarged on bail. Case of present applicant is similar and identical to aforesaid co-accused. There is no such distinguishing feature so as to distinguish the case of present applicant from aforesaid co- accused. As such present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2022 on the ground of parity also. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is urged that the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. 7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State has opposed present bail application. However, the Learned A.G.A. could not dispute the facts as noted above. 8. Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and upon consideration of evidence on record, accusation made as well as complicity of applicant but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant is allowed. 10. Let the applicant-Munna Lal involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on 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) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence. (ii) Applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant and send him to prison. Order Date :- 18.2.2022 YK Digitally signed by YASHWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.02.22 17:16:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad