Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra

1. Heard Shri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ritesh Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 15.07.2020 in Case Crime No.0317 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, added Section 316 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station-Para, District-Lucknow. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

3. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein no allegation has been levelled against the present applicant though, he is not named in the FIR. Father, mother and sister of the present applicant are named in the FIR. However, during the course of investigation, his culpability has been found, therefore chargesheet has been filed against the present applicant as well as his parents. Though, the name of the his sister Mamta has been deleted as no chargesheet has been filed against her. The relation of the present applicant with his wife was so cordial and in last three years of their marriage, no complaint of any kind whatsoever has been made by his wife to her parents or any other person.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The cause of death is strangulation and there are two minor antemortem injuries on the body of the deceased. The present applicant is absolutely unaware as to who had strangulated his wife but chargesheet has been filed against him without having any cogent material or evidence to that effect. He has further submitted that out of total 19 prosecution witnesses, only 05 prosecution witnesses have been examined and cross examined, therefore, keeping in a view the pace of trial, there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future. Mainly, all fact and relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, if the present applicant is released on bail, he will not be able to influence any witness or tamper any evidence. Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also his total period of incarceration in jail i.e. more than five years, he may be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, wherein it has been held that if all fact/ material witnesses have been examined, the bail application of the accused may be considered. Besides, he has relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No. 693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), wherein the Apex Court has held that if there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future and the accused applicant is in jail for a substantial period then the period of incarceration may be considered as a fresh ground. Learned counsel has submitted that in the present case, all fact/ relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. He has further submitted that the present applicant undertakes that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

6. Learned AGA has however opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that the present applicant is the husband of the deceased but he did not dispute the aforesaid facts.

7. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; present applicant is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever, out of total 19 prosecution witnesses, only 05 prosecution witnesses have been examined and cross examined, all fact and relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, keeping in a view the pace of trial, there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future, considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba (supra), K.A. Najeeb (supra) and Paras Ram Vishnoi (supra), considering the period of incarceration of the present applicant i.e. more than five years, considering the undertaking that applicant shall co-operate in the trial proceedings, shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant- (Hiteshwar @ Bholu Goud) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 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 IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. 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. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

10. Before parting with, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial invoking the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, fixing short date, if possible, on day to day basis and if any of the parties does not cooperate in the trial court proceedings properly, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the trial court strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Shri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ritesh Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 15.07.2020 in Case Crime No.0317 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, added Section 316 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station-Para, District-Lucknow. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

3. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein no allegation has been levelled against the present applicant though, he is not named in the FIR. Father, mother and sister of the present applicant are named in the FIR. However, during the course of investigation, his culpability has been found, therefore chargesheet has been filed against the present applicant as well as his parents. Though, the name of the his sister Mamta has been deleted as no chargesheet has been filed against her. The relation of the present applicant with his wife was so cordial and in last three years of their marriage, no complaint of any kind whatsoever has been made by his wife to her parents or any other person.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The cause of death is strangulation and there are two minor antemortem injuries on the body of the deceased. The present applicant is absolutely unaware as to who had strangulated his wife but chargesheet has been filed against him without having any cogent material or evidence to that effect. He has further submitted that out of total 19 prosecution witnesses, only 05 prosecution witnesses have been examined and cross examined, therefore, keeping in a view the pace of trial, there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future. Mainly, all fact and relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, if the present applicant is released on bail, he will not be able to influence any witness or tamper any evidence. Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also his total period of incarceration in jail i.e. more than five years, he may be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, wherein it has been held that if all fact/ material witnesses have been examined, the bail application of the accused may be considered. Besides, he has relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No. 693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), wherein the Apex Court has held that if there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future and the accused applicant is in jail for a substantial period then the period of incarceration may be considered as a fresh ground. Learned counsel has submitted that in the present case, all fact/ relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. He has further submitted that the present applicant undertakes that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

6. Learned AGA has however opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that the present applicant is the husband of the deceased but he did not dispute the aforesaid facts.

7. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; present applicant is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever, out of total 19 prosecution witnesses, only 05 prosecution witnesses have been examined and cross examined, all fact and relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, keeping in a view the pace of trial, there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future, considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba (supra), K.A. Najeeb (supra) and Paras Ram Vishnoi (supra), considering the period of incarceration of the present applicant i.e. more than five years, considering the undertaking that applicant shall co-operate in the trial proceedings, shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant- (Hiteshwar @ Bholu Goud) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 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 IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. 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. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

10. Before parting with, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial invoking the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, fixing short date, if possible, on day to day basis and if any of the parties does not cooperate in the trial court proceedings properly, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the trial court strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench