Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40939 of 2018 Applicant :- Suresh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Anoop Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
Perused the record.
This application has been filed by the applicants, namely, Suresh, Vikas and Avadhesh, seeking their enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 684 of 2017 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 504, 201 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Taryasujan, District Kushingar during the pendency of the trial in the above mentioned case crime number.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of Rajesh, the son of the applicant no.1 Suresh was solemnized with Rani on 26th May, 2017 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Customs. Just after expiry of a period of one year and three months from the date of marriage of the son of the applicant no.1, an unfortunate incident occurred on 24th August, 2017 in which the daughter-in-law of the applicant no.1 sustained burn injuries. Immediately the victim was taken to the District Combined Hospital, Kushinagar on 24th August, 2017, as is evident from the document at page 45 of the paper book from where the victim was referred to B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur on 24th August, 2017 itself. Accordingly, the present applicants departed from District Combined Hospital, Kushinagar for their onward journey. However, as luck could happen, the victim died on way. Information in respect of the aforesaid was given to the parents of the deceased i.e. the daughter-in-law of the applicant no.1. The cremation of the deceased was held on 25th August, 2017 at District Kushinagar in the presence of the family members of the deceased including her father. After about 46 days from the date of cremation of the deceased, a first information report dated 9th October, 2017 in respected of the aforesaid incident, was lodged by the father of the deceased, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0684 of 2017 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 504, 201 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Taryasujan, District Kushingar. In the aforesaid first information report, four persons, namely, Suresh the father-in- law i.e the applicant no.1 herein, Rajesh the husband, Vikash and Gulaicha @ Aincha @ Avadhesh the Devars of the deceased were nominated as the named accused while mother-in-law of the deceased was nominated as unnamed accused. The Police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C., has submitted a charge- sheet against two of the accused persons i.e. the mother-in-law and the husband. Thereafter the Police has submitted second charge-
sheet dated 2nd June, 2018 against the remaining accused persons. The cognizance was taken upon the same by the court concerned vide Cognizance Taking Order dated 21st July, 2018. What has happened subsequent thereto has not been detailed in the affidavit accompanying the present bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 is the father-in-law, whereas the applicant nos. 2 and 3 are Devars of the deceased. The applicant no.1 is aged about 60 years, applicant no.2 is aged about 25 years and the applicant no.3 is aged about 23 years. The applicants have no criminal antecedents to their credit except the present one. The applicants are in jail since 29th May, 2018/23rd May, 2018 respectively. According to the learned counsel for the applicants, the first information report giving rise to the above mentioned case crime number has been lodged after 46 days from the date of the cremation of the deceased, for which there is no explanation. It is the case of the applicants that the deceased had died on account of burn injuries, which she sustained while cooking food, as is stated in the document occurring at page 45 of the paper book. The bona fide of the applicants is also sought to be urged that immediately upon the occurrence, they have taken the deceased to the District Hospital and the information was given to the family members of the deceased and it was on account of the aforesaid that they arrived at the District Combined Hospital, Kushinagar. The husband of the deceased is already in jail. Learned counsel for the applicants also invited the attention of the Court to the order of this Court dated 6th June, 2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12102 of 2018, whereby Meena Devi, the mother-in-law of the deceased has been enlarged on bail. It is urged that the case of the present applicants is similar and identical to that of the co-accused Meena Devi, therefore, on the ground of parity, it is further urged that the applicants are liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants. However, the legal and factual submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants could not be disputed by the learned A.G.A.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail.
Let the applicants Suresh, Vikas, Avadhesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing their personal bonds each and two-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 APPLICANTS 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 APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR 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 THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANTS 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 THEM 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 APPLICANTS.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicants, shall have serious repercussion on their 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.
(Rajeev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 27.10.2018 Sushil/-