High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41469 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6596 of 2025 Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Pandey,Suraj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Sri Ravi Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Sandeep, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 369 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Akrabad, District Aligarh. 4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 05.07.2024 by Kitab Singh against the applicant and 05 other persons regarding the marriage of his daughter Bhuri with the applicant Sandeep around two years back with the allegation that there was a demand of Rs. two lakh as dowry. He has taken loan and given Rs. one lakh but still the accused persons murdered her 04.07.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The deceased committed suicide which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, the deceased has received a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, however, viscera has been preserved for chemical examination. It is submitted that the trial in the matter has started in which Kitab Singh the first informant has been examined as P.W.-1 who has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. It is further submitted that Smt. Nirmala wife of Kitab Singh and mother of the deceased has been examined as P.W.-2 before the trial court who has also not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile, the copy of both the statements have been placed before the Court which are from page 48 to 55 of the paper-book. It is submitted that since the first informant and his wife have been declared hostile, the implication of the applicant in the present case is false. It is argued that co-accused Gajendra Singh the father-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41192 of 2024, the copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.09.2024. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. He is named in the first information report along with other accused persons and there are allegations against him. 7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. In the trial the first informant and his wife have been examined as P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 respectively who have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. Co- accused Gajendra Singh the father-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 9. Let the applicant- Sandeep, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The 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) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 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, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) 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 351 B.N.S.S., 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant. 10. 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 and send the applicant to prison. 11. The bail application is allowed.
Decision
12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad