Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21833 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Sukh Rani Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bhaiya Ram Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This second bail application of the applicant has been filed for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 194 of 2015, under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Bhogaon, District-Mainpuri.
The second bail application has been filed on the ground that as per the prosecution case the applicant and her husband (Balram) had strangulated the deceased but, during the course of trial, Sonu and Monu, brother of the deceased, were examined and they have not supported the prosecution version and were declared hostile and considering the above fact the main accused-Balram has been granted bail by order dated 15.02.2019 by a coordinate bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 44622 of 2016. Copy of the order passed on the bail application of co-accused Balram has been brought on record at page 58 of the paper book.
On the last date, when the matter was taken up the learned counsel for the applicant was directed to file a supplementary-affidavit stating whether the statement of the mother of the co-accused Balram, who was also one of the prosecution witnesses, has been recorded or not.
Pursuant to the order dated 13.09.2019, the counsel for the applicant has filed a supplementary-affidavit stating that the mother of co-accused Balram, that is the mother-in-law of the applicant, namely, Sharda Devi, died on 02.09.2015 and therefore her statement has not been recorded. Photocopy of the death certificate of Sharda Devi provided by the Gram Panchayat, Bhawanipur has been annexed along with the supplementary- affidavit.
It has thus been contended on behalf of the applicant that since the main accused Balram has been granted bail, the applicant being a lady, is entitled to be released on bail. It has lastly been contended that the applicant has no previous criminal history; she is in jail since 24.04.2015 and, in case she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out any feature which may distinguish the case of the applicant from the co-accused Balram, who has been granted bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on ground of parity.
Let applicant Smt. Sukh Rani be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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;
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(iv) 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. 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code; and
(v) 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 her in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 Sunil Kr Tiwari