Delhi High Court - Orders
Shyam Kishor vs State on 9 October, 2020
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
Digitally Signed By:SINDHU
KRISHNAKUMAR
Signing Date:09.10.2020 18:49:32
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 875/2020
SHYAM KISHOR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jitender Jha, Advocate.
(M:9811243945) with Petitioner in
person.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, APP.
Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate for
Complainant.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 09.10.2020 CRL.M.A. 9233/2020 (for modification of o/d 21/05/2020)
1. This hearing has been done by video conferencing.
2. The Petitioner - Mr. Shyam Kishor has joined the proceedings through video conferencing. The Court has interacted with him. He states that he is currently unemployed, though he was a Software Engineer. His brother's business is in Guwahati and his parents live in Bihar. He further submits that he currently does not have any source of income and his father and brother are supporting him. He also states that his father is more than 75 years of age and therefore, he wishes to take care of him.
3. Vide the present application, modification of the bail conditions imposed on 21st May, 2020, to the effect that the Petitioner should be allowed to go to Bihar has been sought. The modification of the bail condition is sought on the ground that the Complainant and the entire family of the deceased wife are in Ludhiana and not Bihar and no prejudice would BAIL APPLN. 875/2020 Page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.10.2020 17:50 Digitally Signed By:SINDHU KRISHNAKUMAR Signing Date:09.10.2020 18:49:32 be caused to them.
4. This application is vehemently opposed by ld. counsel for the Complainant. Ld. counsel for the Complainant submits that relatives of the Complainant live in Bihar and constant pressure is being put on them for withdrawing the complaint.
5. A perusal of order dated 21st May, 2020 granting bail to the Petitioner shows that bail was granted on the following conditions:
"11. After broadly perusing the bank statements of the Petitioner and the deceased, this Court is of the opinion that the Petitioner is financially well- settled. The conduct of the Petitioner, to the extent that he immediately rushed back from the railway station upon receiving a phone call, called the Police, took the deceased to the hospital and contacted the in-laws, goes to show that he does not pose any flight risk. The documents filed on record also show that he indeed booked an Ola cab on the fateful day and was not at home. The bank account statements show that he had been regularly depositing money in his wife's account and there were withdrawals from the same as well. The death of the deceased is quite unfortunate, however, the circumstances that may have led to the same are not clear at this stage. The same would have to be considered at the stage of trial. ....
13. In the present case, the application for bail has been moved during the COVID-19 lockdown. The Petitioner is educated and appears to be well- settled. The charges against the Petitioner have to be thrashed out at trial. The investigation is already completed. Protection against any coercive action has been granted to the niece, however, it is not disputed that the niece is regularly appearing before the Trial Court. The BAIL APPLN. 875/2020 Page 2 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.10.2020 17:50 Digitally Signed By:SINDHU KRISHNAKUMAR Signing Date:09.10.2020 18:49:32 Petitioner has already undergone imprisonment for around one year and seven months. This Court is thus of the opinion that the Petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, subject to on the following terms and conditions:
i. The Petitioner shall furnish a bail bond for a sum of Rs.2 lakhs with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. Subject to the said bail bond and surety being given, he shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case;
ii. The Petitioner shall not leave Delhi without the permission of the SHO, Uttam Nagar; iii. The Petitioner shall not contact any of the witnesses of the prosecution or prejudice the trial in any manner;
iv. The Petitioner shall surrender his passport to the Trial Court, within a period of two weeks, after lifting of the lockdown."
6. The basis of the bail order was that the Petitioner was financially well settled and he did not pose any flight risk. The wife of the Petitioner has already passed away. It is the Petitioner's case that she committed suicide. However, the case of the Complainant is that this is a case of dowry death.
7. Considering the above facts, condition was imposed that the Petitioner shall not leave Delhi without permission of the SHO, PS Uttam Nagar. Modification is being sought by the present application.
8. Further, the status report filed by the ld. APP reads as under:
"1. That the petitioner filed present petition for seeking modification of bail condition to the extent that he should be allowed to stay in his permanent residence in Bihar.
2. That this hon'ble court vide order dated 27/07/2020 directed that the affidavit filed by the petitioner and specially the Delhi address as stated BAIL APPLN. 875/2020 Page 3 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.10.2020 17:50 Digitally Signed By:SINDHU KRISHNAKUMAR Signing Date:09.10.2020 18:49:32 in the affidavit, be verified. The status report be placed on record.
3. That the verification of the address i.e. Flat No. 55, Pocket-B, Metro View Apartment, Sector-13, Dwarka, New Delhi given in the affidavit at para No.3 by petitioner was got conducted. During verification on 12/09/2020 Smt. Rina Sukla W/o Sh. Brijesh Kumar and Petitioner Shyam Kishore were met at the aforesaid address. Statement of Smt. Rina Shukla was recorded. Upon local enquiry in the apartment the resident of flat No.53,54 & 56 and guard namely Kripanand Mishra and Sushil told that they did not know person namely Sham Kishore. They denied for recording of their statement n this regard.
4. That after filing of affidavit/undertaking by the petitioner, he did not submit any further information or detail regarding his employment as mentioned in the affidavit at para No.7."
9. After interacting with the Petitioner and after hearing ld. counsel for the Complainant as also in view of the statement made by the Petitioner today, this Court is of the opinion that no ground is made out for modification of the bail conditions. The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
OCTOBER 9, 2020/dk/T BAIL APPLN. 875/2020 Page 4 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH Signing Date:09.10.2020 17:50