Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41198 of 2018 Applicant :- Chet Ram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Akash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant Chet Ram seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 43 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 304B, 306 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Balrai, District-Etawah during the pendency of the trial.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the son of the applicant, namely, Bal Kishun was solemnized with Savitri Devi on 15.02.2015. Just after the expiry of a period of three years from the date of marriage of the son of the applicant an unfortunate incident occurred on 06.05.2018 in which the daughter-in-law of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The inquest of the body of the deceased was conducted on 06.05.2018, not on the information given by the applicant or any of his family member but on the information given by Kaushal Kishore the nephew of the deceased as the deceased was the Bua of the aforesaid informant. According to the Panch witnesses the death of the deceased has occurred on account of hanging. Therefore, the death of the deceased was classified as suicidal. The post mortem of the deceased was conducted on 07.05.2018. The doctor who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that the cause of death of the deceased was on account of asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. Five days after the incident an F.I.R. dated 11.05.2018 was lodged by the brother of the deceased namely, Anuj Kumar, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0043 of 2018, under Section 498A, 304B, 306 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Balrai, District-Etawah. In the aforesaid F.I.R. six persons namely, Bal Kishun (husband), Chet Ram (father-in-law), Kalyan Singh (Jeth), Mother-in-law, Jethani and one Asha Devi (Nanad) of the deceased were nominated as the named accused. The police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. has submitted a charge sheet dated 17.07.2018 only against the father-in-law, mother-in-law and the husband of the deceased. What has happened subsequent to the submission of the charge sheet, has not been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The applicant is aged about 50 years. He has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. The applicant is in jail since 02.07.2018. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. There is no suicide note of the deceased. Except for the ligature mark no other external injury has been found on the body of the deceased. The husband is already languishing in jail. From the material collected by the Investigating Officer, it cannot be said up to this stage that the applicant has abetted in the commission of the crime. It is thus, urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra the learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant, Chet Ram, 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 Rahul.