Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15822 of 2019 Applicant :- Santosh @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kuldeep Singh Tomar
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri K.S. Tomar, learned counsel for the informant, 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 – Santosh @ Sonu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.527 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 325, 307, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Baldev, District Mathura.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR was lodged by father of Smt. Kuntesh against her husband Santosh (applicant) and his family members stating therein that her daughter was being harassed for non-fulfilment of dowry demand and one day on 17.09.2018 she was kicked out from the roof of the house by the accused persons due to which she sustained injuries and both her legs and wrist were fractured. It has been argued that the applicant had admitted his wife in the hospital. As per rejection order, victim was discharged from the hospital after two days. It has been argued that because the husband of the victim is drunker, therefore, he did not realize as to what was being done by him. After so many years of marriage, there was no complaint and it is only due to conduct of the applicant, the present FIR has been lodged. Earlier also a compromise was entered into between the parties at the police station wherein the applicant had assured that he would not repeat his mistake again. It appears that it is not due to demand of dowry, but due to habit of drinking this incident has taken place. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and 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 17.10.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the informant 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 applicants will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicants will personally appear on each and every date in the court and their personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
iii) The applicants shall personally appear once in the first week of every month in the concerned police station. 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 applicants' 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.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Anand Sri./-