Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32784 of 2021 Applicant :- Shrimati Sonmati Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Surendra Bahadur Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Shrimati Sonmati seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 54 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Sikariganj, District Gorakhpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. It is argued that the marriage of Kuldeep Vishwakarma the son of the applicant with the deceased was solemnized on 12.05.2018. The incident in the present case is of 25.05.2020. It is argued that the deceased committed suicide and died. The cause of death could not be ascertained at the time when the postmortem examination was conducted, the viscera report was preserved after which viscera report has been received in which aluminum phosphide poison was found in it.
It is further argued that general and omnnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons including the applicant. The husband of the deceased is in jail. It is argued that the deceased has not received any bodily injury on her person. The applicant is a lady aged about 65 years. It is further argued that co-accused Ramachal Vishwakarma the father-in- law of the deceased has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.08.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 22052 of 2021 (Ramachal Vishwakarma Vs. State of U.P.) which was subsequently corrected vide order dated 18.08.2021 passed in Correction Application No. 3 of 2021 in the said bail application, copy of the orders have been produced before the Court which are taken on record. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 18 of the affidavit and is in jail since 21.03.2021. It is argued that the applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the First Information Report and there is an allegation against her.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The postmortem report does not state any bodily injury on the person of the deceased. The father-in-law of the deceased namely Ramachal Vishwakarma has been granted bail.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant Shrimati Sonmati, 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(V) 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 her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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 :- 24.9.2021 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)