Allahabad High Court
Titoo vs State Of U.P. on 16 October, 2019
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38207 of 2018 Applicant :- Titoo Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar,Anup Kumar Upadhyay,Mayank Yadav,Umesh Bhardwaj,Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Criminal Case No. 411 of 2016, under sections 363, 365 and 368 IPC, P.S. Khoda Ghaziabad, District Ghaziabad with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is adopted son of Mahesh Chand and daughter of said Mahesh Chand was married with complainant Shankar Pal Singh but she was being harassed by Shankar Pal Singh for dowry and on 16.09.2015, he even tried to murder her by pouring kerosene and since then Hemlata, daughter of Mahesh Chand, was not traceable. Mahesh Chand has lodged an FIR against Shankar Pal Singh and his family members vide Crime No. 641 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 364 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act. On 18.12.2015 and since then Hemlata could not be traced. It was submitted that after few months, husband of Hemlata, namely, Shankar Pal Singh lodged an FIR against the applicant and two unknown persons inter alia alleging that on 16.09.2015, Hemlata was enticed away by Teetu and unknown persons while she has gone to market. That FIR was registered by Shankar Pal Singh by moving an application under Section 156(3) C.r.P.C. Learned counsel submitted that police have not concluded the investigation of the case, which was lodged by Mahesh Chand against Shankar Pal Singh and others, and on the other hand, applicant has been arrested in the said FIR which was lodged by Shankar Pal Singh after several months just to save himself from the case lodged by Mahesh Chand. Even the direction was made by this Court for recovery of Hemlata within two months but she has not been recovered so far. It was further submitted that the father of victim lady, namely, Mahesh Chand has filed an affidavit in support of the present bail application of applicant Teetu, which clearly shows that father of victim lady has no grievance against the applicant. It was further pointed out that co-accused Omveer Singh has already been granted bail by the Court of Additional Session Judge/FTC 1st, Ghaziabad. Learned counsel further submitted that applicant is in judicial custody since 25.05.2018 and that he has no criminal history and in case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail.
It is apparent from record that father of victim lady Hemlata, namely, Mahesh Chad has lodged an FIR against complainant of this case regarding harassment of Hemlata and her abduction in order to commit her murder and that investigation of that case is still pending and that thereafter the FIR of present case has been lodged by the husband of Hemlata against the applicant and others. Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, period of detention of applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
Let applicant Titoo involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5.The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 16.10.2019 A. Tripathi