Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33446 of 2018 Applicant :- Gauri Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case, after the death of her husband, deceased was subjected to injury by legs, fists and lathi over a dispute of land belonging to the husband of the deceased; applicant is the daughter of the nanad of the deceased; postmortem report shows cause of death due to antemortem throttling; applicant is not the resident of the village; during investigation name of the applicant was dropped; she has been summoned to face trial on an application moved under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that all the accused persons except the main accused Shiv Narain Singh have been enlarged on bail; it is urged that the applicant has been falsely implicated, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail; applicant having no other reported criminal antecedent is languishing in jail since 8.8.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Gauri involved in Case Crime No. 224 of 2014, under Sections 147, 302, 149, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Mahrajpur, District Kanpur Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties (one should be of her family members) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 S.Prakash