Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49083 of 2019 Applicant :- Aman Verma @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Tripathi,Bed Kant Mishra,Gore Lal,Hriday Kumar Singh,Jai Prakash Prasad,Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Sengar
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Jai Prakash Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Aman Verma @ Chhotu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 573 of 2019, under Section 306 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that initially the First Information Report was lodged under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act but during investigation, the same was converted into a case under Section 306 IPC. It is argued that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem report wherein the cause of death has been opined is asphyxia as a result of hanging. It is argued that although the deceased was found to have received two other injuries on her body being an abrasion on the palm and a contusion on the left thigh but the same in any manner did not contribute to her death and the same could have been received in the process of committing suicide.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that there is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased. The applicant has no mens-rea at all. There is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant which resulted in the death of the deceased, the applicant has no motive at all to commit the aforesaid offence. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 3 of the affidavit and is in jail since 06.08.2019 Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail vehemently. It is argued that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant on 25.03.2018 and she died on 29.05.2019 which was after about one year and two months and the applicant is named in the First Information Report and there are allegations against him. It is argued that as such the applicant is involved in the present case.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the present case was initially lodged under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act but during investigation the same was converted into a case under Section 306 IPC. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of hanging. The two other injuries received by the deceased, did not in any manner contribute to her death. There is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased. The applicant has no mens-rea at all. There is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant which resulted in the death of the deceased.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence 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.
Let the applicant Aman Verma @ Chhotu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.
(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 21.12.2021 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)