Uttarakhand High Court
Manga Alias Mangeram vs State Of Uttarakhand on 13 May, 2020
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No. 2410 of 2019
Manga Alias Mangeram ....Applicant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.
This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with Case Crime No.118 of 2018, registered with Police Station Jhabrera, District Haridwar for the offences punishable under Sections 302,201 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.
2. Heard Mr. Tapan Singh learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. assisted by Mr. P.S. Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State through Video Conferencing.
3. According to the State/respondent, the deceased wanted to marry a Scheduled Caste boy. So, she ran away with the boy on 06.06.2019. She returned home with Vikas, son of the present applicant, on 07.06.2019. She wanted to marry the said boy, so, on the night of 07.06.2019, the present applicant with the co-accused, father of the deceased, beat her. On 08.06.2019, the watchman of the village lodged an FIR, alleging therein that on 07.06.2019, the applicant and co-accused had murdered the deceased and burned her body. During the course of investigation, the dead body of the deceased had been recovered. The recovered skull (bone) had been sent to F.S.L., Dehradun. However, the report of the F.S.L. is not received so far. After investigation, the charge sheet has been filed.
24. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person; he is falsely implicated; he is not member of the family of the co-accused; the statements of the villagers were not recovered by the Investigating Officer; mother of the deceased stated on oath in her affidavit that her daughter had died on 07.06.2019 due to heart attack and the informant has enmity with her husband and her brother-in-law, the present applicant, therefore, he lodged false FIR just to implicate them and she did not give any statement to the Investigating Officer; the prosecution examined the witness Bhagat Singh, PW-1 and he did not support the prosecution case; the trial is stalled due to COVID-19, pandemic lockdown, the applicant is a resident of District Haridwar; he has no criminal history; and he is in custody since 10.06.2019. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted a copy of the oral evidence of the witness Bhagat Singh, PW-1 and a copy of the affidavit of the mother of the deceased dated 19.12.2019.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail application, however, the learned counsel for the State fairly concede that the mother of the deceased has filed her affidavit, the witness Bhagat Singh, PW-1 did not support the prosecution case and the trial is stalled due to COVID-19, pandemic lockdown.
6. Bail is the rule and the committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. At this stage, it would be inappropriate to discuss the evidences, collected during the investigation, in depth because it is likely to influence the trial court.
7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there 3 is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.
8. The bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
i) the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment;
ii) the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case;
iii) the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial court.
10. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution shall be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Kumar Verma, J.) 13.05.2020 JKJ/Neha