Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashwani Prakash Tripathi, learned AGA 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 Chhaya Rathor, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 421 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Shikohabad, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that initially an information about the recovery of a dead body, a motorcycle and certain articles kept in the motorcycle was flashed by QRT mobile on which one mobile phone found at the place of occurrence and through the recovered mobile someone was called and thus the identity of the deceased was known as that Pushpendra Kumar. It is then argued that after the information was received by the police the inquest was then conducted on the same day i.e. 12.6.2019. The post mortem examination was also conducted on the same day wherein the doctor found a ligature mark around the neck of the deceased and opined the cause of death due to strangulation and then the F.I.R. was got registered by Mahesh Chandra, the brother of the deceased in which the applicant and Santosh Shastri has been shown as the accused persons. It is further stated that the body of the deceased was found in Bhudha Nahar and when the inquest was conducted it was suspected that the death was due to drowning in Nahar.
It is argued that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye witness to the murder. The applicant is the wife of the deceased who is stated to be having some relationship with one Santosh Shastri and it is suspected that due to the said relationship she got her husband murdered along with the co-accused Santosh Shastri. It is argued that there is no recovery from the possession of the applicant of incriminating material as stated in para-25 of the affidavit. It is argued that the applicant is a lady and is also entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-27 of the affidavit and is in jail since 12.8.2019. Learned counsel counsel for the applicant argued that the co-accused Raj Kumar alias Chhotu has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.6.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11962 of 2020, copy of which has been produced before the Court which is taken on record.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has argued that the applicant was having illicit relationship with co-accused Santosh Shastri which was not liked by the deceased who was the husband as such she got him murdered.
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 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-Chhaya Rathor, 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 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.
(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 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her 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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 12.1.2021 Naresh