Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4953 of 2016 Applicant :- Akram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Prasad Mishra,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.
Applicant- Akram has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 3205 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 506 I.P.C. and under Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Loni, District Ghaziabad.
I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the F.I.R. and also the bail rejection order.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The further contention is that despite time being granted to the learned AGA, Viscera Report has not been produced. He next contended that applicant is husband of the deceased, Smt. Reshma, who died a natural death in her matrimonial home on 11.11.2014, while she was being taken to the hospital by the applicant's brother. The information about the deceased's death was admittedly given by the applicant to his father-in-law, as is evident from the perusal of the F.I.R. He next contended that it is apparent from the perusal of the postmortem report of the deceased (Annexure-5) that neither any antemortem injury was found on her body nor cause of death could be ascertained. Viscera report of the deceased, which has been brought on record today by learned AGA, does not indicate presence of any kind of poison. Hence there is no evidence on record at this stage, indicating that the death of the deceased is either suicidal or homicidal. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.12.2014 and he has served out more than half of the minimum sentence of imprisonment prescribed for conviction under Section 304-B I.P.C. and and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. It has been pointed out that applicant is not having any criminal history.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicant but he very candidly stated that viscera report of the deceased does not indicate presence of any poison.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant Akram involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019/V.S.Singh