Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47104 of 2018 Applicant :- Pinki Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Bhadauria Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Puneet Bhadauria, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Pinki, seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 304 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Bakewar, District Etawah during the pendency of the trial.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the brother of the applicant namely Vikas @ Sintu was solemnized with Mona on 6.5.2017. However, just after the expiry of a period of eleven months from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 24.4.2018, in which the Bhabi of the applicant namely Mona died on account of burn injuries. The inquest of the deceased was conducted on 25.4.2018 not on the information of the applicant or any of his family members but on the information given by ward boy namely, Lalit. In the opinion of the Panch witnesses, the death of the deceased was characterized as homicidal. The post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 25.4.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased opined that the cause of death of the deceased was shock due to ante-mortem burn injuries. The Doctor further detailed external ante-mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased as follows:-
"Mention type, shape, length x Breadh & Depth of each injury and its relation to important body landmark, indicate which injuries are fresh and which are old and their duration Superficial to deep burn (1 to 3) all area the body except peried both sole, both axilla. Red line of demarcation the B/W bounded unpurd area skin peeled of all place "
The F.I.R. in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 25.4.2018 by Ranjeet the brother of the deceased, which was registered as Case Crime No. 304 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Bakewar, District Etawah. In the aforesaid F.I.R., four persons namely, Vikas @ Sintu (husband), Shivswaroop @ Pappu (father-in-law), Smt. Shila Devi (mother-in-law), Pinki (Nand) of the deceased were nominated as the named accused. The Police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number, submitted a charge-sheet dated 4.10.2018 against all the named accused. Upon submission of the charge sheet dated 4.10.2018, cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned vide cognizance taking order dated 12.10.2018. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case has not yet been committed to the court of sessions.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the married nanad of the deceased but she is innocent. The applicant is in jail since 12.9.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to her credit except the present one. It is next submitted that since the applicant is married nand of the deceased, she is residing separately from the matrimonial house of the deceased. To support his submission, he has invited the attention of the Court to the documents brought on record by means of the supplementary affidavit filed in Court today. On the basis of the same namely, Voter List, the certificate issued by the Sabhasad of the concerned Nagar Panchayat and voter I.D. of the election commission of Government of India, it is thus urged that since the applicant is residing separately from the matrimonial house of the deceased, the applicant has no concern with the family life of the deceased. As such, the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, he could not dispute the factual and legal submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the material brought on record as well as the complicity of the applicant and without making any comment on the merits of the case, I find that applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Pinki, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond 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 HE/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 HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(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 THE HIM/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 his/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 :- 20.12.2018 Arshad