Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in
Case Details
Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42516 of 2022
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.180 of 2020 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.Lalganj, District Mirzapur. 3. The applicant is husband of the deceased and as per contents of first information report,was married to the deceased three years prior to the date of incident whereafter continuous harassment for dowry demand was made and upon its unfulfilment, murdered the deceased who is sister of the informant on 16.07.2020. It is stated that prior to burning the deceased, she was strangulated and beaten up due to which her teeth was also broken. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him only on account of fact that he is husband of the deceased. It is stated that in fact the deceased had committed suicide on account of financial transaction between the applicant and informant whereunder the applicant had loaned a considerable amount of money to the informant who is brother in law but was not returning the loaned amount despite requests by the deceased. It is submitted that feeling ashamed of aforesaid conduct of his brother, the deceased committed suicide and applicant has been implicated by informant only to wriggle out of payment of loan amount. It is further submitted that applicant is under incarceration since 17.07.2020 and during course of trial, the informant as P.W. 1 did not support prosecution version and was declared hostile. It is submitted that evidence of only one prosecution witness has been completed. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application with submission that applicant being husband of deceased, presumption is upon him to discharge. 6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution." 7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that although allegations of dowry demand has been made in the F.I.R. and an unnatural death has occurred within three years of marriage, presumption is being sought to be discharged with submission that the deceased has committed suicide owing to financial transactions between applicant and informant due to which she felt extremely embarrassed. The informant as P.W. 1 has also not supported the prosecution version and was declared hostile as per certified copy of his deposition which is on record. Applicant is in jail since 17.07.2020 with evidence of only one prosecution witness having been completed although as per charge sheet there are a total of 20 prosecution witnesses and as such, there does not appear to be any hope of early conclusion of trial. As such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 9. Let applicant Vijay Bahadur, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 12.12.2022 kvg/- Digitally signed by GIREESAN KV Date: 2022.12.13 13:13:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad