Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22894 of 2021 Applicant :- Shaqeel Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Keshari Nath Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pawan Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant and perused the record of the case.
By means of this application, applicant-Shaqeel, who is involved in Case Crime No. 337 of 2020, under sections 498-A, 323, 377, 376-D, 354, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Bhojpur, district Moradabad, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution case, the informant/victim Smt. Rihana lodged first information report on 08.07.2020 for the offence under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, regarding the incident which took place on 25.05.2020 against seven accused persons, namely, Khushbey Ali (husband), Ameer Hussain (father-in-law), Smt. Bhuri (mother-in-law), Nabi Hasan (brother-in-law), Ameer Jahan (Nand), Nazakat, (Nandoi) and Mohammad Nabi (mediator of the marriage) making allegation of harassment and torture against the accused persons on account of non- fulfillment of demand of dowry.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that marriage of victim/informant was solemnized on 04.11.2018 with Khushbey Ali. The applicant is brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the victim. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that neither the applicant named in the first information report nor in the statement of the informant recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. The name of the applicant came into light for the first time in the statement of the informant recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. on 15.09.2020. It is pointed out that after recording the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim/informant, her second statement was recorded on 23.09.2020, in which she has stated that since she was not inclined to go in her matrimonial home, therefore on the advice of her counsel, she has made allegation against the applicant. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is living separately in district Rampur, whereas offence took place in district Moradabad. The applicant has no concern with the matrimonial affair of the victim and her husband. The applicant has not committed any cruelty or harassment with the victim. The applicant is not beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of other co-accused persons, who are named in the FIR. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit and is facing detention since 12.04.2021. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Learned counsel for the applicant lastly submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but does not dispute the factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, and also the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the informant and he is living separately in district Rampur. There is no allegation against the applicant in the first information report as well as in the statement of the informant recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. The informant/victim in her second statement has stated that she has made allegation against the applicant on the advice of her counsel. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of other co-accused persons, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Shaqeel, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of Digitally signed by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh Date: 2021.07.30 15:44:16 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 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 applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) 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.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
It is made clear that parity of this order granting bail to the applicant Shaqeel shall not be extended to other co-accused persons.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 Sazia