High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140582 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30605 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. A.K. Chaubey, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. This application for bail has been filed by applicant Rajan seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 28 of 2023 under sections 498A, 306 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Mathura, during the pendency of trial. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 13.1.2023, a belated F.I.R. dated 15.1.2023 was lodged by first informant Ranvir and was registered as Case Crime No. 028 of 2023 under sections 498A, 306 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Mathura during pendency of trial. In the aforesaid FIR three persons namely Rajan, Taravati, and Rakhi have been nominated as named accused. Record shows that marriage of applicant Rajan was solemnized with Mohini on 28.11.2011. From the aforesaid wedlock, two children namely, Harsh and Ananya were born. However, just after expiry of period of more than 12 years from the date of marriage of applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 13.1.2023, in which wife of applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The information regarding aforesaid incident was not given by applicant or any of his family members at the concerned Police Station but by Ranveer Singh the father of deceased. On the said information, the inquest of the body of deceased was conducted. In the opinion of witnesses of inquest (panch witnesses), the nature of death of deceased was characterized as suicidal. Thereafter, the post mortem of the body of deceased was conducted. The doctor who conducted autopsy of the body of deceased found following ante-mortem injuries on the body of deceased: "1. DA Ligature mark- length 21 cm. width around 1 cm- 1.5 cm and --5 cm below right over -- 5 cm below chin -- 6 cm beelow left ear --- An Contuse--- mark sized 2 cm x 2 cm just below angle of left jaw" In the opinion of autopsy surgeon, the cause of death of deceased is Asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. After aforesaid proceedings were completed, the first informant i.e. father of the deceased lodged a belated F.I.R. dated 15.1.2023, which was registered as Case Crime No. 28 of 2023 under sections 498A, 306 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Mathura. In the aforesaid F.I.R. three persons namely, Rajan, Taravati and Rakhi have been nominated as named accused. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to effect that inspite of the fact that marriage of daughter of first informant was solemnized on 28.11.2011 and two children were born from the said wedlock, yet demand of additional dowry was made. On account of non fulfillment of additional demand of dowry, physical and mental cruelty was committed upon the daughter of first informant. Ultimately, information was received that the daughter of first informant has committed suicide. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer, examined first informant and other witness who have supported the F.I.R. On the basis of above and other material collected by Investigating Officer during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that complicity of applicant is fully established in the crime in question. He accordingly submitted the charge-sheet dated 14.3.2023, wherein the investigation in respect of other accused is said to be pending. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is named as well as charge sheeted accused but he is innocent. Marriage of applicant was solemnized with deceased on 28.11.2011. From the said wedlock, two children were born. Considering the precarious condition of applicant, allegations made in the F.I.R. are prima facie false and not worthy of acceptance. According to learned counsel the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. Offence complained of has to be judged in the light of the provisions contained in Section 307 IPC read with Section 107. However, up to this stage, there is no such material on record on the basis of which it can be definitely concluded that applicant has abetted, instigated or conspired in the commission of crime or the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of applicant either. To buttress his submission he has relied upon the following judgments: i). Sarvesh Vs. State of U.P. 2018 ADJ Online 0163. (ii). Kanchan Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2021 SCC OnLine SC 737. (iii). Mirza Iqbal alias Golu and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1251. (iv). Mariano Anto Bruno and Another Vs. Inspector of Police 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1387. It is next contended that applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 19.1.2023. As such, he has undergone more than six months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. i.e. charge sheet has already been submitted on 30.9.2022. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystalized. However, up to this stage, no such incriminating circumstance necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the course of trial has emerged. Resultantly, applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. To lend legal support to his submission, he has relied upon the judgement of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhaschandra Gangwal and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another, 2023 Live law (SC) 373 (Para 5). It is lastly contended that considering the precarious condition of applicant, it is improbable that applicant will do any such act leading to the death of deceased. He, therefore submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is are enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present 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, he could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant with reference to record at this stage. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence as well as the complicity of applicant and the submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant, the police report having been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant now stands crystalized irrespective of above, no such circumstance could be pointed out by the learned A.G.A. necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the course of trial, the judgement of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhaschandra Gangwal (Supra), but without making any comment on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. Let the applicant Rajan, 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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. (ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC. (iv) 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 313 CR.P.C. 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above. Order Date :- 14.7.2023 Arshad Digitally signed by :- ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad