Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5870
of 2021
Applicant :- Vikas Kumar @ Heeru
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu Pratap Singh,Brajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hari Nath Chaubey
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard S/Shri Sudhanshu Pratap Singh and Brajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsels for the applicant; Shri Hari Nath Chaubey, learned counsel for the complainant and Shri Faraz Kazmi, learned State Law Officer and also perused the record.
By means of the present bail application the applicant, who is facing prosecution in connection with Case Crime No.423 of 2020, u/s 498A, 304B, 306 I.P.C. and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Shivali, District-Kanpur Dehat, is seeking his enlargement on bail during trial. The applicant is in jail since 20.9.2020.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that a usual F.I.R. was registered by Raghuvanshi Kashyap on 11.9.2020 for the incident said to have taken place on 17.5.2019 u/s 498A, 304B, 306 I.P.C. and Section ¾ of Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicant and seven others. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. In the F.I.R. a usual allegation of dowry related harassment has been levelled and it is also mentioned that after strangulating the neck of the deceased, her in-laws were fled away from the site. The marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant on 17.5.2019. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that in fact the deceased was expecting a baby and on account of post delivery complications she has succumbed to death. Post- mortem report of the deceased reveals that there is stitched wound over her abdomen, and except that, there is no other external injury seen over her body. Viscera of the deceased was preserved to ascertain the cause of death. In the viscera report of the deceased no poison was found. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court to the statement of Smt. Madhubala Saxena, who was posted as Asha Bahu at Bikru Centre, in which she stated that the deceased was in the advanced stage of pregnancy and having excessive bleeding, therefore, she has referred the patient to some specialized center. The statement of Dr. Akhnal Mishra, who conducted the delivery of the deceased, indicates that the lady was in precarious health condition and unfortunately she died. From the entire facts and circumstances, it seems that this was a natural death on account of post delivery complications of the deceased and there is no angle of dowry related harassment. The applicant is in jail since 20.9.2020 having no criminal antecedents.
Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by making a mention that the deceased died within a year of her marriage and there are allegations of additional dowry on account of which the deceased died unnaturally.
I am afraid to accept the contention advanced by learned counsel for the complainant in the light of statement given by Smt. Madhubala Saxena, Asha Bahu and Dr Akhnal Mishra, who conducted the delivery of the deceased, as such, it seems to be a clearcut case of unfortunate death of the lady on account of post delivery complications.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, the period of detention undergone by the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Vikas Kumar @ Heeru, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her 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.
Order Date :- 26.10.2021
M. Kumar