Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49333 of 2018 Applicant :- Smt. Hasina Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Smt. Hasina, seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 1017 of 2018 under Sections 304B, 498A, IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahar, during the pendency of the trial.
It transpires from the record that the marriage of the son of the applicant namely Intejar was solemnized with Ruksana in accordance with Muslim Rites and Customs on 22.11.2013. Just the expiry of a period of little more than four years and nine months from the date of the marriage of the son of the applicant an unfortunate incident occurred on 16.9.2018, in which the daughter-in-law of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The FIR in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 16.9.2018 by Sahjad the brother of the deceased, which was registered as Case Crime No. 1017 of 2018 under Sections 304B, 498A, IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahar. In the aforesaid FIR seven persons namely Intejar (husband), Gulnar (Nanad), Smt. Haseena (mother- in-law), Dilshad (devar), Istequar @ Buddhan (father-in- law) and Haneef (maternal father-in-law) of the deceased were nominated as the named accused. The inquest of the body of the deceased was conducted on 16.9.2018 on the information of the first informant. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses the death of the deceased was characterised as suicidal. The post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on the next day i.e. 17.9.2018. 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. However, no external ante mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. The police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime no. in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. has submitted the charge sheet dated 28.11.2018 against three of the named accused i.e. husband, father-in-law and the mother-in-law of the deceased, who is the applicant herein. Rest of the four named accused have been excluded. What has happened subsequent to the submission of the charge-sheet dated 28.11.2018 has not been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the bail application nor the same has been disclosed at the time of hearing of the present bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The applicant is an old lady. The applicant is in jail since 5.10.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to her credit except the present one. It is then submitted that the deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. The absence of any external ante-mortem injury on the body of the deceased speaks of the bona fide of the present applicant. It is then submitted that on the date of the occurrence, the husband of the applicant, who is the father- in-law of the deceased was admitted in hospital and the present applicant was attending her husband. This fact stands substantiated from the material, which founds part of the case diary as the same has been disclosed in the statement of independent witnesses also. General and omnibus allegations have been made in the FIR regarding the demand of dowry and the commission of cruelty upon the deceased for non-fulfilment of dowry. The applicant cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the said demand. The husband of the deceased is already languishing in jail. There is no statement of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C. nor there is dying declaration of the deceased. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is thus urged that the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, learned AGA would not dispute the factual and legal submissions raised by the learned counsel for 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.
Let the applicant-Smt. Hasina 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.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 Ravi Kant