Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16403 of 2021 Applicant :- Salman Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anirudh Kumar Upadhyay
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Let the counter affidavit filed today in Court be taken on record.
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. 113 of 2020 under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station - Gaur, District - Basti with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
From the perusal of the files, it reveals that there is a panchayatnama at page No. 24 of the paper book and the complainant as well as accused both are Panch to the said panchayatnama. It was written therein that the deceased was having no external visible injury on her body. When the post-mortem of the deceased was conducted, the doctor found no external or internal injury on the person of the deceased and cause of death could not be ascertained. The viscera was preserved and viscera report shows that the deceased had consumed aluminium phosphide, as is evident from the forensic science lab Report annexed on the page No. 44 of the paper book.
The FIR of this incident was lodged by the complainant about the untimely dowry death of his daughter and as many as five persons were nominated in this incident including present accused Salman Khan. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 08.08.2020 and the report of this incident was lodged on 12.08.2020.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present accused Salman Khan happens to be Dewar of the deceased and general allegations have been levelled against all the accused. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the deceased's platelets' counts were found to be 33000, which is evident from the pathology report dated 6.8.2020 annexed at page No. 61 to the paper book of this bail application. It is next argued by the learned counsel that the deceased died due to consumption of aluminium phosphide herself due to illness and the present accused has illegally been implicated in this matter and the FIR of this incident was lodged by the complainant just to extort illegal money from the in-laws of the deceased. It is also submitted that the panchayatnama was executed in the presence of the complainant and no external or internal injury was found on the person of the deceased by the doctor who conducted the post- mortem of the deceased. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 16.11.2020 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. Shri Aniruddha Upadhyaya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail application.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the 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 Salman Khan 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 tSalman Khanhe 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 :- 29.7.2021 LBY