High Court · 2022

Heard Mr. Bharat Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. This application for bail has been filed applicant Vijendra Pal seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. of 2022, under sections 304B, 498AIPC, and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Dataganj, District Badaun during the pendency of trial. Perused the record. It transpires from record that marriage of Rahul son of applicant was solemnized with Usha on 21.5.2021 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. However, just after expiry of period of one year and few days from the date of marriage of son of applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 19.6.2022, in which the daughter-in-law of applicant Usha died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The information regarding aforesaid incident was not given by the applicant or any of her family members at the concerned Police Station but by Raghunandan. On the aforesaid information, the inquest of 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, post mortem of the body of deceased was conducted on the same day. The Doctor who conducted autopsy on the body of deceased, found following ante-mortem injuries on the body of deceased: "Ligature mark oblugque size 28 cm x 1 cm around neck with a gap of 8 cm on right side back of neck Ligature mark present 3 cm below right ear 5 cm below chin and 4 cm below left ear" In the opinion of autopsy surgeon, the cause of death of deceased was asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. Subsequent to above, father of deceased namely, Raghunandan lodged an F.I.R. dated 19.6.2022, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0286 of 2022, under section 304B, 498A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Dataganj, District Badaun. In the aforesaid F.I.R. three persons namely, Rahul, Santosh, Vijendrapal have been nominated as named accused. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that marriage of deceased was solemnized with Rahul on 21.5.2021. Sufficient amount of goods and dowry were given at the time of marriage of Usha. However, in-laws of daughter of first informant were dissatisfied with the same. Additional demand of dowry to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- and a bullet motorcycle was made. As the additional demand of dowry was not fulfilled, physical and mental cruelty was committed, upon daughter of first informant. Ultimately, the daughter of first informant died and information regarding same was received on 16.9.2022. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined first informant and other witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. Witnesses so examined have supported the prosecution story. On the basis of above and other material collected by him during course of investigation, Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that complicity of all the named accused is established in the crime in question. Accordingly, Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet dated 5.10.2022, whereby all the named accused including applicant herein have been charge sheeted under sections 304B, 498A IPC, and 3/4 D.P. Act. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is a named as well as charge-sheeted accused but he is innocent. Applicant is father-in-law of deceased. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. Except for the ligature mark, no other external injury was found on the body of deceased. The same speaks of the bonafide of applicant. Applicant cannot be said to be beneficiary of alleged demand of dowry. The husband of the deceased i.e. son of applicant is languishing in jail. Learned counsel for applicant thus contends that applicant was residing separately from the husband of the deceased. A categorical argument to that effect has been made in paragraph 15 of the affidavit. Upto this stage, there is no such material on record on the basis of which it can be definitely inferred that applicant has even abetted in the commission of alleged crime. It is lastly 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 19.9.2022. As such, he has undergone more than 2 and 1/2 months of incarceration. In case applicant is 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 this application. He submits that applicant is named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, as well as complicity of applicant, accusation made coupled with the fact that applicant was residing separately from the famly of deceased, paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application having not been denied by learned A.G.A., there being no other external ante-mortem injury on the body of deceased, except for the ligature mark, 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 Vijendra Pal, 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 :- 6.12.2022 Arshad MAHMOOD Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad