498A, bail after 4 years Jail

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Court No. – 53

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 11816 of 2016

Applicant :- Padma Bhushan Shukla
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gufran Ahmad Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pratyush Kumar,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant, Padma Bhushan Shukla, who is involved in Case Crime No.745 of 2012, under Sections 364, 494, 498-A I.P.C. P.S.- Attraulia, District-Azamgarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. His first bail application was rejected on 10.6.2015. The applicant is confined in jail since 16th December, 2013. Learned counsel submits that trial of the case has not progressed since the date first bail application was rejected.

Perusal of the ordersheet Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit to some extent substantiate this averment, hence, there is new ground to consider the second bail application of the present applicant.
Learned counsel in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is the husband of the kidnapped person Veenu, she was married with the applicant in the year 2006. She gave birth to one male child. Thereafter marital life of the couple was disturbed and wife of the applicant had left the marital house and gone somewhere. On account of bad relations an F.I.R on the basis of false and ficitious facts has been lodged. He further submits that case was not properly investigated, wife of the applicant was not searched and recovered, applicant is confined in jail for the last four years and not a single witness has been examined. Other co-accused who have been granted bail are regularly attending the court. There is no apprehension that applicant would tamper with the prosecution witness or would not be available for trial.
Arguments advanced in support of the application make out prima-facie a case for bail.

READ  ONKAR NATH MISHRA & ORS

Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application and it has been submitted that the applicant had remarried with other lady in the lifetime of his legally wedded wife and in order to avoiding embarrassing he has concealed her or murdered her and she has not been recovered so far.

After hearing the arguments and perusing the material available on record and taking into consideration seriousness of the offences, punishment provided therefor, evidence available in support thereof, I think this is a fit case for bail.

Let applicant, Padma Bhushan Shukla, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

(i). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, if 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 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 8.5.2017
SKD

READ  Magistrate should not blindly call all family members as respondents

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *