SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mukesh Tiwari vs State Of U.P. on 16 November, 2019


?Court No. – 27

Case :- BAIL No. – 10946 of 2019

Applicant :- Mukesh Tiwari

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Amrendra Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that initially the applicant was granted bail under Sections 498A and Section306 I.P.C. vide order dated 30.06.2014 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Bail No.4488 of 2014, the bail order is on record as Annexure-5 to the bail application. Later on charge was altered under Section 304-B I.P.C, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 302 I.P.C. was added. It is further contended on behalf of the applicant that during investigation initially Sections 304 I.P.C and 3/4 D.P. Act were dropped and now again they have been added. It is further contended on behalf of the applicant that he has himself surrendered before the Court, during bail he has not misused liberty of bail. He has no criminal history. He has further drawn the attention of the Court towards the statement of Investigating Officer, P.W.10 which is also on record which shows that in his cross examination Investigating Officer has categorically stated that the deceased Kanti Devi consumed poison in his paternal home and became unconscious and in that unconsciousness state son of the informant took her to her matrimonial home where the applicant and his mother got admitted her and gave a proper treatment. Later on she died. It is further contended on behalf of the applicant that co-accused Lajja Devi has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.11.2019 passed in Bail No.10369 of 2019.

It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. on the basis of written statement has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

Let the applicant, Mukesh Tiwari involved in Sessions Trial No. 15 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 340 of 2013, under Sections 498A, Section304B, Section302 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station – Karnailganj, District – Gonda 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iv) 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.

(v) 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.

(vi) 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.

Order Date :- 16.11.2019




Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation