1. Heard Sri Sudhakar Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P.
2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No. 83 of 2020, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station - Bakshi Ka Talab, District - Lucknow.
3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the first information report of the case has been lodged by the brother of the deceased on 10.02.2020, alleging that the deceased who was Priest at Temple has been murdered by causing serious cut mark injuries on his neck, but no person was named in the first information report.
4. It is next submitted by the counsel for the applicant that subsequently during investigation an application/complaint was made by the complainant after one year of the incident to the effect that the applicant is responsible for murdering the deceased. It has been stated by the complainant that the applicant got contract for fishing rights in the pond situated next to he temple, the applicant wanted to put certain fish in the pond but the same was objected by the deceased as the same would pollute the entire area and this lead to enmity between the deceased and applicant. It has been been stated that only because of the said delayed complaint the applicant was apprehended.
5. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that during investigation no material has emerged which can implicate the applicant in the said crime nor any evidence of last seen or any weapon has been recovered which could link the applicant to the said crime. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is in jail since 07.02.2021.
6. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the fact that there is delay of one year in implication of the applicant and also that there is neither any material nor any weapon has been recovered on the pointing out of the applicant which can link her with the crime coupled with the fact that there is no last seen evidence against the applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
8. Let applicant Kishni Devi @ Raj Kumari Rawat be released on bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2020, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station - Bakshi Ka Talab, District - Lucknow, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 his 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
10. This order shall not influence the trial Court for proceeding with the trial.
11. The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.8.2021 A. Verma (Alok Mathur, J.)