Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41699 of 2019 Applicant :- Vishram Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Nath Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Crime No.117 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibiton Act, Police Station: Mangalpur, District Kanpur Dehat.
As per prosecution case, on 2.5.2019, the deceased died after consuming some poisonous substance.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and was residing separately, whereas the deceased was residing with her husband. It has been argued that similarly placed co-accused Smt. Parvati, wife of applicant, has already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 18.11.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.50405 of 2019. It has been further argued that only general allegations have been made against the applicant, who is in jail since 31.5.2019; trial may take sometime for its final disposal and, therefore, he be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposes the application for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the fact that only general allegations have been made against the applicant, who is father-in-law of the deceased, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
Let applicant Vishram Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) 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/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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under section 229-a I.P.C.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/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 him/her, in accordance with law, under section 174-a I.P.C.
(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/her 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.
However, it is made clear that any willful 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 :- 29.11.2019 RKK/-