High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31730 of 2022 Applicant :- Surendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Sharma,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Legal Reasoning
Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon consideration of evidence on record, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased 16 years prior to the date of lodging of F.I.R., two children named above being born out of wedlock, no proceedings under Section 498A having been initiated against the applicant, the judgement of this Court in Sarvesh (Supra), the clean antecedents of the applicant, an offence under Section 306 I.P.C. being subject to trial evidence, clean antecedents of applicant but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, present application for bail is allowed. Let the applicant- Surendra Singh 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. 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 :- 21.12.2022 A. Mandhani Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Sharma, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. This Application for Bail has been filed by applicant, Surendra Singh seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2021 under Sections 498 (A) and 306 I.P.C., P.S. Amrahat, District Kanpur Dehat during the pendency of trial. Perused the record. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 19.10.2021, a delayed F.I.R. dated 21.10.2021 was lodged by first informant, Azad Singh (brother of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 0059 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 306 I.P.C., P.S. Amrahat, District, Kanpur Dehat. In the aforesaid F.I.R., eight persons namely Surendra Singh, Rajabeti, Ram Babu, Balke, Surjeet, Lali, Ganpat and Ramesh have been nominated as named accused. Gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that marriage of the sister of first informant was solemnized with the applicant about 16 years ago from the date of F.I.R. The character of applicant is stated in the F.I.R. to be not morally correct; F.I.R. further records that on account of instigation made by applicant, first informant committed suicide. It is pertinent to mention here that prior to the lodging of the aforesaid F.I.R., information regarding the occurrence which occurred in the night of 18/19.10.2021, was given not by applicant or any of his family members but was given by father of the deceased at the concerned police station. On the aforesaid information, the inquest (panchayatnama) of the body of the deceased was conducted. In the opinion of witnesses of inquest (panch witnesses), the nature of death of the deceased was opined as suicidal. The cause of death of the deceased was determined as hanging. Thereafter post-mortem of the body of deceased was conducted. The Doctor who conducted autopsy of the body of the deceased found following ante-mortem injuries on his body: "Ante Mortem Injuries:- Ligature Mark:- Whole Neck circumforarm 2.7 cm Gap of ligature Mark- 8 Cm right side back of neck Breadth of ligature Mark- 03 Cm Distance of Ligature Mark Right Trages- 6 cm Lt-Trage- 8 cm Below- chin 6 cm White of litature present on cut section of ligature" In the opinion of autopsy surgeon, the cause of death of deceased was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined the first informant and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. who have supported the F.I.R. On the evaluation of the same, Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that complicity of only one of the named accused i.e. applicant (husband of the deceased) is established in the crime in question. He accordingly submitted the charge-sheet dated 29.05.2022 whereby applicant has been charge-sheeted under Section 498A and 306 I.P.C. whereas the other named accused has been exculpated. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though applicant is husband of the deceased, a named and charge-sheeted accused but he is innocent. Marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased almost 16 years ago from the date of lodging of F.I.R. From the aforesaid wedlock, two children i.e. Aditya, aged about 15 years and Saksham now aged about 7 years, were born.In view of the aforesaid precarious condition, it is impossible to believe that applicant shall abet/ instigate or conspire in the commission of the alleged crime. As per the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the statement of the witnesses examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C., what can be inferred against the applicant, is bad conduct but not abetment or instigation. To lend legal support to his argument, he has relied upon the judgement of this Court in Sarvesh Vs. State of U.P. 2018 ADJ Online 0163. With reference to the material on record, learned counsel for applicant contends that on the basis of above, it cannot be concluded that applicant has abetted or instigated in the commission of alleged crime. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents having no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 27.05.2022 as such, he has undergone more than six and half months' of incarceration. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial. Per-contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for bail. He submits that since applicant is a named as well as charge-sheeted accused, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant at this stage.