Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45588 of 2018 Applicant :- Harpal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Anurag Shrivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Sateyndra Narayan Singh and Mr. Anurag Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
Perused the material on record.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant Harpal Singh for seeking his enlargement of bail in Case Crime No. 0424 of 2018 under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Seohara, District Bijnor during the pendency of the trial.
It transpires from the record that the marriage of the son of the applicant, namely, Navbahar was solemnized with Sangeeta in the year 2007. From the aforesaid wedlock, two sons, namely, Ansh Kumar, Rohit Kumar and one daughter, namely, Parul Rani are said to be born, who are said to be minors. The said fact is evident from the recital contained in the Ration Card of the son and daughter-in- law of the applicant, photo copy of which is on record at page-67 of the paper book. Roughly the after expiry of a period of more than 10 years from the date of marriage of the son of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 20th July, 2018 in which the daughter-in-law of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The information of the aforesaid incident was conveyed to the Police and on the basis of the said information the Police arrived at the place of occurrence and on the statement of the Police Officer concerned, the inquest of the body of the deceased was performed on 20th July, 2018. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the death of the deceased was characterized as homicidal. The postmortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 20th July, 2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that the cause of death of the deceased is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. Except for the ligature mark, no other external ante- mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. A first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged after two days i.e. on 22nd July, 2018 by the father of the deceased, namely, Suresh Singh, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0424 of 2018 under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Seohara, District Bijnor. In the aforesaid first information report, five persons, namely Naubahar Singh, Sanjay, Arjun, Dharmi and Harpal Singh were nominated as the named accused. Upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter-XII Cr.P.C., the Police submitted the charge-sheet dated 22nd October, 2018 against the husband and father-in-law of the deceased i.e. the applicant herein. Rest of the named accused have been excluded. What has happened subsequent to the submission of the aforesaid charge-sheet has neither been detailed in the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application nor the same has been disclosed by either of the learned counsel for the parties at the time of hearing of the present bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased but he is innocent. The applicant is an old man aged about 68 years. To buttress his submission, he has referred to the Ration Card of the present applicant, in which the date of birth of the applicant has been recorded as 15th May, 1950 and the photo copy of the same is on record at page-66 of the paper book. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. Apart from the above, it is also urged that the applicant is residing separately. To substantiate the aforesaid submission, he has referred to ration cards of the applicant and the husband of the deceased as well as the electricity bills of the applicant and the husband of the deceased, to show that there is distinct and separate living of the applicant from the family of the deceased. It is also urged that the proof of the charge punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. is subject to trial evidence. However upto this stage, there is no such evidence on record to show that the applicant has aided, conspired or instigated in the commission of the alleged crime. As such it is urged that there is no abettment on the part of the present applicant in the commission of the alleged crime. In light of the aforesaid submissions, it is, thus, urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant being the father-in-law of the deceased is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. He submits that the present applicant is a charge-sheeted accused and is father-in-law of the deceased. As such, the bail application of the present applicant is liable to be rejected. However, the legal and factual submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed by the learned A.G.A.
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.
Let the applicant Harpal Singh 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.
(Rajeev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Sushil/-