Allahabad High Court
Smt. Shahjahan vs State Of U.P. on 19 January, 2021
Author: Rahul Chaturvedi
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43014 of 2020 Applicant :- Smt. Shahjahan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Raj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Shri Abhay Raj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
By means of the present bail application the applicant Smt. Shahjahan, who is mother-in-law, is seeking her bail in connection with Case Crime No.210 of 2020, u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Bhojipura, District-Bareilly. She is languishing in jail since 03.7.2020.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Contention is that on the same day of the incident i.e. on 01.7.2020 the F.I.R. was got registered by Nasrat Khan, father of the deceased, against three named accused persons including the applicant, with the allegation that her son-in-law was demanding a cooking range and a gas cylinder from the deceased and on this account she was tortured and harassed. The deceased has died within one year and three months of the marriage by committing suicide. The entire tirade of allegations is against the husband Amin Khan, therefore, his case stands distinguishable. The post mortem report reveals that there is singular ligature mark around the neck and the cause of death is shown to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. There is no dying-declaration or suicide note left by the deceased. The husband is languishing in jail. Submission is that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and taking into account the inter-se relationship, she may be released on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 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 Smt. Shahjahan, who is involved in aforesaid Case Crime be released on bail on her 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 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 HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER 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 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 HER, 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 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
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 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 :- 19.1.2021 M. Kumar