Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46744 of 2019 Applicant :- Mohd. Arif Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemendra Pratap Singh,P.C.Srivastava,R.P.S. Chauhan
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Mohd. Arif with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. - 200 of 2019, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 324, 325, 354, 377, 494 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Islam Nagar, District - Budaun, during pendency of trial.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of demand of dowry and other offences, punishable with imprisonment upto life;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 10.09.2019, the applicant is in confinement since then;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation;
(iv) as to criminal history, one case has been registered against the applicant under Section 366 IPC with respect to the marriage performed by the applicant with the real sister of the informant. In that case, the statement of the girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is in favour of the applicant;
(v) though investigation is pending yet, at present, no justifiable cause has been shown to continue the detention of the applicant for an indefinite period;
(vi) on prima facie basis, only it may be noted, according to the applicant on 02.08.2019, an FIR had been registered against the applicant under Section 366 IPC with respect to the marriage performed by the applicant with the real sister of the informant. That FIR had been lodged by the father of the informant in the present case. As noted above, the girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. supported the claim of marriage performed by the applicant. Then, though marriage of the applicant with the informant is of the date 22.02.2017, a month after the earlier criminal case came to be lodged, the present FIR has been registered wherein for the first time, the allegation of demand of dowry and other offences have been made.
4. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the aforesaid submission and submitted that the applicant has practically admitted to have committed offence of contracting the second marriage during the life time of the informant.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, at present, it cannot be overlooked that preceding the present FIR allegation of 366 IPC had been made, which may practically failed in view of the statement of the informant recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Insofar as grievous injuries are concerned, it may remain a matter to be considered at trial, however, there is no risk of tampering of evidence or intimidating the witness by the applicant.
6. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the final merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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, with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. Also, it is expected that the investigation may be concluded as expeditiously as possible.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Abhilash