High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:121211 Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17296 of 2022 Applicant :- Morpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Mohan Pandey,Bhaskar Bhadra,Ram Raj Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Legal Reasoning
(C) While passing an order on an application for grant of bail, there is no need to record elaborate details to give an impression that the case is one that would result in a conviction or, by contrast, in an acquittal. However, a Court cannot completely divorce its decision from material aspects of the case such as allegations made against accused; nature and gravity of accusation; having common object or intention; severity of punishment if allegations are proved beyond reasonable doubt and would result in a conviction; reasonable apprehension of witnesses being influenced by accused; tampering of evidence; character, behaviour, means, position and standing of accused; likelihood of offence being repeated; the frivolity in the case of prosecution; criminal antecedents of accused and a prima facie satisfaction of Court in support of charge against accused. The Court may also take note of participation or part of an unlawful assembly as well as that circumstantial evidence not being a ground to grant bail, if the evidence/ material collected establishes prima facie a complete chain of events. Parity may not be an only ground but remains a relevant factor for consideration of application for bail. (D) Over crowding of jail and gross delay in disposal of cases when undertrials are forced to remain in jail (not due to their fault) may give rise to possible situations that may justify invocation of Article 21 of Constitution, may also be considered along with other factors. (See, State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur vs. Balchand @ Baliay (AIR 1977 SC 2447 : 1978 SCR (1) 535; Gurcharan Singh vs. State (Delhi Administration), (1978) 1 SCC 118); State of U.P. vs. Amarmani Tripathi, (2005) 8 SCC 21; Prasanta Kumar Sarkar vs. Ashis Chatterjee and Anr (2010)14 SCC 496; Mahipal vs. Rajesh Kumar, (2020) 2 SCC 118; Ishwarji Mali vs. State of Gujarat and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 55; Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. The State of U.P. and others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 89; Ashim vs. National Investigation Agency (2022) 1 SCC 695; Ms. Y vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr :2022 SCC OnLine SC 458; Manoj Kumar Khokhar vs.
Arguments
1. Heard Bhaskar Bhadra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Srivastava, learned AGA for the State. 2. Applicant- Morpal has approached this Court for bail in Case Crime No. 132 of 2021 under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Bhuta, District- Bareilly. 3. The applicant before this Court is husband of deceased who died under other than normal circumstances within about two years of her marriage. According to post mortem report, cause of death was asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. 4. Sri Bhaskar Bhadra learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is behind the bars for last more than two years and according to his instructions, till date out of proposed 15 prosecution witnesses, only one prosecution witness has been examined. He fairly submits that the testimony of P.W.-1 is similar to the statement recorded during investigation. He further submits that initially FIR has been lodged against he five named accused, however, after investigation charge sheet has been filed against the applicant, his father and mother. The parents of applicant have already been granted bail by co- ordinate Benches of this Court. Learned counsel further submits that considering the period of detention as well as present status of trial, the applicant, who is in jail since 2.6.2021 may be released on bail during trial. 5. While opposing bail, Sri Sunil Srivastava, learned AGA appearing for State submits that since the evidence collected during investigation remain consistent that there are allegations against the applicant also that he has committed cruelty upon his wife in regard to demand of dowry. However, it is not disputed that father and mother of the applicant have already been granted bail. 6. LAW ON BAIL - A SUMMARY (A) The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail. (B) Power to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is of wide amplitude but not an unfettered discretion, which calls for exercise in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course or in whimsical manner.