HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 35912 of 2018
Applicant :- Sangeet @ Sanjeev
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Satsangi,Nazrul Islam Jafri
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.580 of 2017, under Sections 304B, 498A, 323, 201 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that according to prosecution version deceased Shivani was married with applicant on 1.7.2017 and Ramboo father-in-law of the deceased told the informant and his wife Angoori Devi on 13.10.2017 at about 6:30 p.m. that Shivani has died then he reached the place of cremation and on his report to police last rites was not performed and dead-body was sent for postmortem. In postmortem report cause of death of the deceased was not ascertained and viscera was preserved. As per viscera report no poison was found and Dr. A. Kumar Agarwal has been examined who has stated that the possibility of death cannot be ruled out on account of cardiac attack. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2017.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that within three months of marriage the death has occurred and applicant is the husband of the deceased, therefore, he does not deserve any benevolence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the submission advanced by learned counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case as well as statement of the doctor, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant-Sangeet @ Sanjeev involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) 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 :- 21.1.2020