Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Rajeev vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 October, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34616 of 2021 Applicant :- Rajeev Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 100 of 2021, under Sections 306 IPC, Police Station - Safai, District - Etawah with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The report of this incident was lodged against 25.05.2021 against Rajeev (applicant). It was alleged in the FIR by complainant Rohit Kumar that on getting information he went to the matrimonial house of his sister saw her dead body on the bed. No body was present in the house. It was further alleged by the complainant that husband (applicant) of his sister was harassing and that is why she committed suicide. The matter was reported to the police.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that the deceased has committed suicide herself and present applicant has falsely been nominated in this case for her suicide. It is submitted that reason behind her suicide is that the applicant was earning his livelihood at Mumbai and was not able to carry her to Mumbai. Only for this reason she committed suicide. It cannot be said to be an element of instigation or abetment on the applicant to have compelled his wife to commit suicide. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 2.6.2021 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. But he does not dispute the fact that the evidence collected by prosecution does not show anything against the applicant that he has abetted or instigated the deceased to commit suicide.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering that the death has taken place after seven years of marriage and no presumption can be drawn that the deceased has committed suicide out of any instigation or abetment or harassment caused by the applicant to her, considering the period of detention of the applicant and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant Rajeev involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). 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;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
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 :- 25.10.2021 LBY
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Rajeev vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 October, 2021
Judges
  • Ajit Singh
Advocates
  • Sanjay Mishra