Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42910 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Saroj Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Sunder Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in connection with Crime No.306 of 2019 under Sections 498-A, 304-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Achhnera, District Agra.
As per prosecution case, marriage of deceased Rita was solemnized with the son of applicant on 5.9.2015 and she died an unnatural death on 2.9.2019 by hanging herself.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and whatever dispute there was, it was between the couple. He submits that only general allegations have been made against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is an old lady, aged about 60 years and is in confinement since 5.9.2019. It has been further argued that the husband of the applicant has already been granted bail by this Court.
On the other hand, learned AGA and learned counsel for the objector seriously oppose the bail application.
Considering the totality of the case, in particular the facts that there are general allegations against the applicant and that the applicant, who is mother-in-law of the deceased, is an old lady, aged about 60 years and further considering the fact that the husband of the applicant (father-in-law of the deceased) has already been released on bail by this Court, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
Let applicant Smt. Saroj Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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 PC, 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 I.P.C.
(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 PC. 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 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 willful 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 :- 28.11.2019 RKK/-