Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Nooh@ Munna vs State Of U.P. on 30 May, 2022
Author: Manoj Misra
Bench: Manoj Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 45 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21670 of 2022 Applicant :- Mohd. Nooh@ Munna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Srivastava,Mohd. Farooq 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.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 64 of 2021, under Section 306 I.P.C., police station Khakhreru, District- Fatehpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The first information report has been lodged through an application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. which was filed after 20 days of the incident.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that deceased was married to the applicant 13-14 years before the incident and therefore the benefit of legal presumption under Sections 113-A and 113-B of the Evidence Act would not be available to the prosecution. It has been submitted that the autopsy report discloses a case of asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging and except a ligature mark, suggestive of ante-mortem hanging, no other injury has been found on the body of the deceased. It has been contended that the deceased could not bear a child therefore, on account of depression, she committed suicide. It has been submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history; he is in jail since 02.07.2021 and, in case he is enlarged on bail, he 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 anything material to the contrary.
Having regard to the facts of the case and that the applicant was married to the deceased 13 years ago; keeping in mind the nature of ante-mortem injury found on the body and the submission that the deceased was issueless, therefore, used to be depressed, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Mohd. Nooh@ Munna be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his 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 he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 his 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.5.2022 Sunil Kr Tiwari