Navi Husain & Anr. v. State of U.P

Heard Sri Kedar Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA- I, for the State and perused the material brought on record. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to malicious intention. It is next contended that applicants are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased and attained the old age suffering from old age ailments. It is next contended that general role has been assigned to the applicants. There is no dying deceleration of the deceased. It is next contended that applicants have never demanded any dowry or committed any cruelty upon the victim for the fulfilment of dowry. The entire prosecution story is improbable, far beyond the truth. There is no independent, impartial reliable witness of the alleged incident. It is next contended that the ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations.

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that applicants have no previous criminal history and there is also no possibility of applicants either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicants are in jail since 05.03.2021, and undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicants without disputing the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants. Courts have taken notice of overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref: Sue, Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020 , Contagion of Covid 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India).

These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail. Let applicants- Navi Husain and Rajiya wife of Navi Husain, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 35 of 2021, under Sections - 498-A, 304-B, IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Banakata, District- Deoria, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

The applicants will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

They will not tamper with the witnesses.

They will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period. 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 applicants to prison. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. Order Date :- 5.1.2022