Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30435 of 2018 Applicant :- Munnalal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
As per the prosecution case, the father of the applicant no. 1 was found murdered and his body was found in a box in the house; F.I.R. has been lodged by the brother of the deceased who is next door neighbour.
It is urged that the applicant no. 1 is the son of the second wife of the deceased and used to quarrel with regard to the property; applicant no. 2 is the wife of applicant no. 1; postmortem examination report reflects nine injuries and the cause of death is antemortem injury due to shock and hemorrhage. It is further urged that the applicant no. 1 is the sole legal heir of the deceased, therefore, there is no motive to have committed the alleged offence; applicants are languishing in jail since 15.12.2016, hence, they are entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that as per the postmortem examination report the period of death is about 1 and 3/4 day, therefore, prima facie, it appears that applicants were present in the house at the time of the incident.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, I find no good ground for grant of bail to the applicant no. 1, Munnalal, involved in Case Crime No. 3 of 2016, under Section 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Erwakatra, District Auraiya Accordingly, the bail application insofar as it relates to applicant no. 1 is rejected.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same expeditiously on day to day basis from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if, there is no legal impediment.
The Registrar General of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned trial court for compliance.
Applicant no. 2 being a lady and having a child is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, let the applicant no. 2, Sarita Devi, involved in aforesaid case, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 K.K. Maurya