High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13208 of 2022
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Smt Aarti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhanu Prakash Verma,Ashutosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shri Krishan Yadav Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J. Heard Sri Bhanu Prakash Verma and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Shri Krishan Yadav, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Smt Aarti for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 1587 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Highway, District Mathura, during trial. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that applicant is 'jethani' of the deceased and she has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of enmity and her relation with the deceased. It is further submitted that the first information report of this case was lodged by the father of the deceased namely Devswaroop against the husband of the deceased and his parents and instant applicant namely Smt. Aarti with the allegations that the accused persons have committed the murder of the deceased on the basis of non fulfillment of the demand of dowry of Rs. 20 lacs. However, it is evident from the record that the deceased had met with a train accident as she was hospitalized by one Gajendra and his friend Sunny, who at the relevant date and time were present at the railway station and had seen that the deceased had come under the train. Both these persons got the deceased admitted in Niyati Hospital where she was treated and from her belongings a suicide note was also recovered wherein it was stated that "she had decided to finish her life and the responsibility will be of her husband and the brother of her husband namely Jaideep, his wife Aarti and mother-in-law had assaulted her and ousted her from their house and also that Sanjay (her husband) loves his 'bhabhi' namely Aarti and do not want to leave her." However, during the course of investigation the handwriting on the suicide note was not found of the deceased. The postmortem report of the deceased shows that she has sustained multiple injuries on her person including 'fracture of ribs' and after completion of the investigation the complicity of the instant applicant was not found and she was exonerated and charge-sheet was not filed against her. During the course of trial an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was moved by the prosecution and the trial court had summoned the applicant to face trial for the offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted that during the course of investigation the investigating officer has collected evidence which reflects that the deceased had met with an accident and it was not a case of dowry death and the investigating officer has not found any role of the applicant in the crime and, therefore, exonerated her but the applicant has been summoned by the trial court to face trial and applicant undertakes that she will abide by any directions/conditions which may be imposed by this Court as well as by the trial court. Co-accused persons Mohan Lal and Smt. Premwati (Parents-in-law of the deceased), who were named in the first information report and were also charge-sheeted, have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 07.09.2021 and 06.12.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 12690 of 2021 and 41868 of 2021 and the case of the applicant is on better footing than those who have been granted bail as she was not charge-sheeted by the investigating officer and by any stretch of imagination she could not be the beneficiary of dowry which was being allegedly demanded. Applicant is in jail in this case since 02.03.2022 and she is not having any previous criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail she may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Learned counsel for the informant/complainant on the other hand submits that the deceased has been murdered by the accused persons including the instant applicant in a very smart way. The cold blooded murder has been given the colour of an accident as the husband of the deceased is working in Railways and it is very easy for him to procure witnesses pertaining to an accident and, therefore, evidence of the railway employees suggesting that the deceased had met with an accident and also the witnesses Gajendra and Sunny who allegedly had taken the deceased to the hospital are procured and are planted by the husband of the deceased and, therefore, their testimony could not be believed. It is also submitted that applicant is residing in the house and, therefore, she cannot escape the criminal liability. Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed heinous offence and, therefore, she is not entitled to be released on bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the applicant is 'jethani' of the deceased. She was though, named in the first information report, but was not charge-sheeted and it was on an application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. she was summoned by the trial court to face trial for the offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. The suicide note which has allegedly been recovered from the belongings of the deceased has been disputed by learned counsel for the informant as well as the handwriting was also not found of the deceased by the handwriting expert. The investigating officer during the course of investigation has recorded the statement of two witnesses namely Gajendra and Sunny, who claimed that the deceased had met with a train accident and they took her to some hospital where she ultimately died. the informant/complainant is that as the husband of the deceased is working in Railways he has procured witnesses and it is a case of murder. The applicant is not having any criminal history. She was not charge-sheeted by the investigating officer. Mohan Lal and Smt. Premwati (Parents-in-law of the deceased), standing on the identical footing as of the applicant, have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Applicant is in jail in this case since 02.03.2022 without any previous criminal antecedents and the presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions. the stand of Per contra, Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed. Let the accused/applicant- Smt Aarti involved in above- mentioned case, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. (ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 27.4.2022 Praveen Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.04.27 16:37:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad