Heard Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 354 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Budh Nagar is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is in jail since 6.6.2020.
Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. The F.I.R. was got registered against the husband, Rizwan and his family members attributing a general role of dowry harassment and a demand of Swift car and Rs.2 lakhs. It is further submitted that the incident took place on 19.4.2019, whereas, the F.I.R. came into being on 21.4.2019. It has been contended that burial of the deceased was done right in front of her parents in their village, but after lodging of the F.I.R. the dead body of the deceased was dug out from graveyard and inquest report was too prepared on 23.4.2019. On this it has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the entire prosecution story is an afterthought implicating the entire family members of husband of the deceased, Rizwan. The husband is in jail. It is further submitted that co-accused Furkan (jeth) and Adil Saifi (Dewar) have already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 11.11.2020 and 4.11.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 54343 of 2019 and 25283 of 2020. Learned counsel has submitted that there is traumatic swelling on her head, but the doctor has opined that she died on account of ante-mortem injury over her head. In fact after this long interval of 4-5 days, it is not possible to pinpoint the exact cause of her death. Moreover, her parents were within the knowledge and they have participated in her last rites but for the ulterior motive has lodged the present F.I.R.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant, who is the father-in-law of the deceased aged about 60 years, has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant- Mohammad Hanif Saifi, who is involved in Case Crime No. 354 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 7.1.2021 Vikas