Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45060 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt Kapoori Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinod Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Ankit Prakash, learned AGA for the State.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Crime No. 200 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Milak, District Rampur.
As per prosecution case, the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased Mamta whose marriage was solemnized with Raj Kumar son of the applicant about a year prior to the date of incident. On 22.04.2019, the deceased died after hanging herself.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the applicant is almost identical to that of her husband Chandrapal, who has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 49669 of 2019. He submits that only general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. Lastly it has been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 16.05.2019, and there is every likelihood that the trial may take some time for its final disposal.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposes the application for bail.
Considering the totality of the case, in particular the fact that almost similarly placed co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court and the fact that the applicant is already in jail since 16.05.2019, without further commenting on merits, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
Let applicant- Smt.Kapoori Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) 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 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 her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 her, 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 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 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.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 nethra