Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31937 of 2018 Applicant :- Saurabh @ Pravendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Vijai Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to carry out necessary corrections in the memo of application during the course of the day.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.337 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station-Kakod, District-Bulandshahr is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the deceased against the applicant and other family members for the alleged incident said to have been taken place on 03.11.2015. The allegation is that the deceased was married to the elder brother of the applicant. The applicant is the brother-in-law(devar) of the deceased. The deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the members of her matrimonial house in connection with the demand of additional dowry and due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry, she was murdered. General and omnibus role has been assigned to all the family members. The applicant was summoned in exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 2016 "State Vs. Gaurav and others" vide order dated 22.12.2016. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Bulandshahar has rejected the bail application of the applicant on 18.07.2018. Though, the applicant has been named in the FIR but during investigation, his name was dropped by the police having not found anything incriminating against him. He cannot be said to be a beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry. The applicant is in jail since 25.06.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the age and relationship of the applicant with the deceased and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Saurabh @ Pravendra Kumar, involved in case crime no.337 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station-Kakod, District-Bulandshahr be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond 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 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 COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., 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, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(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.P.C. 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 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 wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 Sumit S