Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35 of 2019 Applicant :- Ganeshi Lal Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Mahesh Kumar Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Narendra Kumar Tiwari.
2. This application for bail has been filed by the applicant- Ganeshi Lal Pal, the father-in-law of the deceased for seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 551 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Nawabad, District-Jhansi, during the pendency of the trial of the.
3. It transpires from the record that the marriage of the son of the applicant namely Pawan Lal was solemnized with Asha Devi on 28.11.2017. However, just after the expiry of a period of 11 months from the date of the marriage of the son of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 19.10.2018, in which the daughter-in-law of the applicant namely Asha Devi died. The first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged belatedly on 20.10.2018 by Chaturbhuj Pal, the father of the deceased, which came to be registered as Case Crime No. 551 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Nawabad, District-Jhansi. In the aforesaid F.I.R., six persons, namely, Pawan Pal (the husband), Ganeshi Pal (the father-in-law), Smt. Jasoda the mother-in-law, Priyanka, (the nand) of deceased and Rajendra and Virendra (the mamas of the husband) of the deceased. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 21.10.2018 on the information of the first informant. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the cause of death of the deceased was characterized as suicidal.
4. The post-mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 21.10.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased, opined that the cause of the death of the deceased was on account of asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The said opinion is alleged to have been expressed by the doctor on the basis of the fact that no congestion was found in the body of the deceased. Accordingly, the viscera was preserved. 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 11.1.2019 against three of the named accused. Three of the named accused namely Priyanka (the nand) and Rajendra and Virendra (the mama of the husband) of the deceased have been excluded. The Chief Chemical Analyst has submitt4ed the viscera report dated 18.1.2019 in which it has been stated that no foreign chemical compound was found in the sample of the body of the deceased.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased, but he is innocent. The applicant is in Jail since 23.10.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. The death of the deceased is not unnatural. No fatal external ante- mortem injury has been found on the body of the deceased nor any element of poison has been found by the Chief Chemical Analyst, as per viscera report dated 18.1.2019. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is then urged that the death of the deceased is natural and therefore, the applicant, though he is the father-in- law of the deceased is liable to be enlarged on bail.
6. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, they could not dispute the factual submissions urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
8. Let the applicant-Ganeshi Lal Pal 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.
9. 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.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 HSM