Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16289 of 2019
Applicant :- Rajeev
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- A.C.Srivastava,Samir Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shravan Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri A.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shravan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Rajeev with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.260 of 2018, under Sections 364 & 201 I.P.C., Police Station Rohta, District Meerut.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is husband of the victim and his marriage was performed with Neeraj (missing) in the year 1992. On 26.07.2018 the information was given by the husband to the informant with regard to missing of the victim when she was going to collect certain money from him (informant) and at about 1.30 p.m. the applicant confirmed whether she has reached the place or not. An application was moved before the S.S.P. concerned on 28.07.2018 by the applicant regarding missing of his wife from 25.07.2018 at about 7-8 p.m. It is argued that the FIR has been lodged by brother of the missing victim with the allegation that earlier also in the year 2015 a case was filed against the applicant under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. in which maintenance was granted by order of the learned court which was not being placed by the applicant, therefore, the applicant is responsible for missing of the victim. It has been argued that the applicant had no motive or intention to do any act to harm his wife after 28 years of marriage. The victim has no child. It is also stated that there was money dispute with the brother of the victim and money was to be given by brother of the victim, therefore, the informant (brother) has reason to harm his sister so that he may grab her share. It is next contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
i) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
iii) The applicant shall personally appear once in the first week of every month in the concerned police station till finalization of the case. In case of any default, the in-charge, police station shall forthwith inform the concerned court about this breach.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
Office is required to communicate this order to the S.S.P. concerned, who is required to convey this order to the concerned police station to ensure compliance of condition no.iii as provided hereinbefore.
The concerned court below which will accept the bail bonds is also directed to convey a photo-copy of this order to the concerned police station so that the condition no.iii provided hereinbefore may be complied with.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India & Another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2004, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Anand Sri./-