Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2841 of 2019 Applicant :- Dilip Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Laxman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. M.P. Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Laxman Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the complainant.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant-Dilip Gupta seeking his enlargement on bail in Sessions Trial No. 525 of 2018 (State Vs. Pradeep Gupta) under Sections 306, 323 and 498A I.P.C. arising out Case Crime No.307 of 2018 under Sections 306, 323 and 498A I.P.C., Police Station-Jalalabad, District- Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of the above mentioned trial, which is said to be pending in the Court of Additional District Judge- Ist, Shahjahanpur.
It transpires from the record that the marriage of the elder brother of the applicant, namely, Pradeep Gupta was solemnized with Sobha Gupta on 16.02.2010 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. From the aforesaid wedlock, a girl child, namely, Ananya is said to be born on 26.11.2010 and on date she is said to be aged about 8 years. However, after the expiry of a period of more than 7 years from the date of marriage of the brother of the applicant-Pradeep Gupta, an unfortunate incident occurred on 11/12.06.2018, in which the wife of the brother of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. An information was given by the present applicant at the Police Dial No.100 and on the basis of the aforesaid information received by the concerned police station, the message was flashed by the Police on the Radio Set and on the basis of the flashed message, the inquest of the deceased was held. The inquest was performed on 12.06.2018 . In the opinion of the Panch witnesses the death of the deceased was said to be suicidal. The post-mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 12.06.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased, opined that the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. However, the Doctor, found 10 ante-mortem external injuries on the body of the deceased, which are detailed herein below:
"1.A ligature mark 26cm. x 3 cm. present all around the neck, non continuous obliquely upwards above thyroid cartilage in between chin and larynx, 4 cm. below chin, 3 cm. below right ear, 4.5 cm. below left ear interupped with the gap of 4 cm. present on right side back of neck. The base of groove hard & parchment like on section subtantaneous issue under the ligature mark white and glistning.
2. Contusion 3 cm. x 1.5 cm. present on dorsum of right hand, 5 cm below writ joint.
3. Contusion 3.5 cm. x 1.5 cm. present on dorsum of the hand, 6 cm. below wrist joint.
4. Contusion 6cm. x 2 cm. present on right ankle joint.
5. Contusion 4cm x 2 cm. present on right leg (out aspect) 5 cm. below knee.
6. Contusion 3.5 cm. x 1 cm. present on left foot 3.5 cm. below medial malleolus.
7. Contusion 4cm. x 1cm. present on it medial malleolus.
8. Contusion 5.5 cm. x 2cm. present on it leg anteriorlaterla aspect 19 cm. below it knee.
9. Contusion 7 cm. x 3 cm. present on it thigh, 9 cm. above left knee (on ant. aspect of it thigh)
10. Contusion 10 cm. x 3cm. on right glured region."
The first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 12.06.2018 by the brother of the deceased, namely, Nirmal Kumar @ Niloo Kumar, which was registered as Case Crime No.307 of 2018 under Sections 306, 323 and 498A I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Jalalabad, District-Shahjahanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., four persons, namely, Pradeep Gupta-husband, i.e. the applicant herein, Mithlesh-mother- in-law, Sandeep Gupta-Devar and Dileep Gupta-Devar of the deceased were nominated as the named accused. The Police on the basis of the material collected during the course of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C., submitted a charge sheet dated 12.09.2018 only against the husband, namely, Pradeep Kumar. Subsequently a charge-sheet dated 14.12.2018 has been submitted against three other named accused, namely, Dilip Gupta, Sandeep Gupta and Mithlesh Gupta. Upon submission of the charge-sheets dated 12.09.2018 and 14.12.2018, cognizance was taken by the court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 15.09.2018. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Accordingly, Sessions Trial No. 525 of 2018 (State Vs. Pradeep Gupta) under Sections 306, 323 and 498A I.P.C came to be registered and the same is now said to be pending in the Court of Additional District Judge-Ist, Shahjahanpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of the present bail application submits that though the applicant is the Devar of the deceased but he is innocent. The applicant is in Jail since 11.12.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is then submitted that from the wedlock of the brother of the present applicant and the deceased, a girl child, namely, Ananya is said to be born on 26.11.2010 and on date she is said to be aged about 8 years. It is next submitted that the proof of charge under Section 306 I.P.C. is subject to trial evidence. Upto this stage, there is no evidence to show that the applicant has aided, conspired or instigated in the commission of the alleged crime. In short, the submission is that there is no abetment on the part of the present applicant. Elaborating his submissions, learned counsel for the applicant submits that looking into the precarious condition of the family of the brother of the applicant, it is impossible to believe that the present applicant shall abet in the commission of the alleged crime. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is urged that the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. It is lastly submitted that the co accused, namely, Pradeep Gupta husband of the deceased and Mithilesh Gupta father-in-law of the deceased have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vie orders dated 17.12.2018 and 17.01.2019 respectively. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused, as such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned AGA for the State and Mr. Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. However, they could not dispute the factual and legal submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, nor they could draw the attention of the Court to any such material in the case diary on the basis which, prima-facie charge under Section 306 I.P.C. can be said to be established against the applicant.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon consideration of the evidence on record as well as the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the applicant-Dilip Gupta 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 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under section 229-A I.P.C.
(iii) 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.
(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 him 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 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.
In addition to the above, it is further provided that the learned trial court to gear up the trial and make necessary endeavour to conclude the same within one year provided the applicant would render all necessary co-operation in early conclusion of the trial.
(Rajeev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 22.1.2019 Sushil/-