Allahabad High Court
Shivram Varma @ Pankaj Verma vs State Of U.P. on 25 July, 2023
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148675 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28372 of 2023 Applicant :- Shivram Varma @ Pankaj Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Narayan Pandey Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Raj Kamal Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Gaurav Sisodia, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Om Narayan Pandey, the learned counsel representing first informant.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant Shivram Verma @ Pankaj Verma seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.97 of 2023, under Sections 323, 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Sadar Bazar, district Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of trial.
Perused the record.
Record shows that the marriage of applicant Shivram Verma @ Pankaj Verma was solemnized with Roli (daughter of first informant) on 25.11.2020 in accordance with Hindu rites and custom. However, the couple was not blessed with any child. Just after expiry of a period of two years and two months from the date of marriage of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 04.02.2023 in which the wife of applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The information regarding aforesaid incident was given by applicant himself at the concerned police station. On the above information, the police arrived at the spot and recovered the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter, the inquest (Panchayatnama) of the deceased was conducted on 05.02.2023. In the opinion of the witnesses of inquest (Panch witnesses), the nature of death of the deceased was characterized as suicidal. Subsequently, the post-mortem of the body of deceased was conducted. In the opinion of autopsy surgeon, the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia as a a result of ante-mortem hanging. It is apposite to mention here that except for ligature mark, no other external ante-mortem injury was found on the body the deceased. The autopsy surgeon found following ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased-Roli :
"Ante-mortem Injuries :-
A ligature mark 26.0 cm x 1.0 cm around the neck, obliquely upward between chin and larynx, 5.5 cm below Rt. Ear & 4.0 cm below mid of chin, interrupted with the gap of 3.0 cm Lt side of neck the groove is dry and parchment like on section the subcutaneous tissue under the ligature mark white & glistering. Dribbling of dry saliva mark present on Rt angle of mouth."
After aforementioned exercise had been undertaken, the father of the deceased, namely, Parsuram lodged a delayed F.I.R. dated 05.02.2023, which was registered as Case Crime No.0097 of 2023, under Sections 323, 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Sadar Bazar, district Shahjahanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., three persons, namely, Pankaj Verma-applicant herein (husband of the deceased), Smt. Sridevi (mother-in-law of the deceased) and Sangeeta (married Nanad of the deceased) have been nominated as named accused.
The gravamen of the allegations made in the first information report is to the effect that marriage of the applicant was solemnized with Roli, daughter of the first informant, on 25.11.2020 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage, sufficient amount and goods were given as dowry. However, the in-laws' of the daughter of first informant were dissatisfied with the same. Thereafter, additional demand to the tune of rupees two lacs for purchase of four wheeler, a motorcycle and gold chain was made but as demand of additional dowry was not fulfilled, physical and mental cruelty was committed upon the daughter of first informant. In this regard, previously a Panchayat was also held but in vain. Ultimately, the daughter of the first informant has been done to death on 04.02.2023.
After aforementioned F.I.R. was lodged on 05.02.2023, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII CrPC. He examined the first informant and other witnesses, namely, Ravindra Varma, Ram Bahadur, Naeem Khan, Veer Pal, Sobhit, Nirmal Lalu Prasad, Ram Chandra, Satypal, Sugriv Babu, Ram Niwas, Khusi Ram, Rahul, Chandra Pal, Nitin Sharma, Aadesh and Mohit Kumar and recorded their statements under Section 161 CrPC. On the basis of above and other material collected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that complicity of mother-in-law and the husband of the deceased, namely, Smt. Sridevi and Pankaj Verma is established in the crime in question. He accordingly submitted the charge-sheet dated 04.05.2023 whereby aforementioned two named accused have been charge-sheeted, whereas other named accused has been exculpated.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that though applicant is the husband of the deceased and a named/charge-sheeted accused yet he is liable to be enlarged on bail. The deceased was a short tampered lady and she has taken the extreme step to commit suicide by hanging herself. The bona fide of the applicant is further explicit from the fact that except for the ligature mark, no other external or internal ante-mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. Though the couple was married on 25.11.2020 however, no issue was born out of the said wedlock. It is on account of above that the deceased remained under frustration.
Learned counsel for the applicant has then invited the attention of the court to the F.I.R. and on basis thereof he contends that the allegation with regard to demand of additional dowry as detailed in the F.I.R. is wholly vague. No material particulars in respect of the same have been mentioned either in the F.I.R. or in the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC. The said fact is not contradicted by the learned A.G.A. Attention of the Court was then invited to the judgement of the Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & others Vs. State of Bihar (2022) 6 SCC 599 and on basis thereof he urged that since material particulars with regard to demand of additional dowry are conspicuous by their absence in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of the witnesses so examined, the same are therefore liable to be ignored by this Court at this stage. The police report under Section 173 (2) CrPC has already been submitted. As such the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystalized. Up to this stage, there is no material on record to indicate abetment, instigation or conspiracy against applicant in the commission of crime or that the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of applicant. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as, he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Up to this stage, no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 06.02.2023. As such he has undergone almost five and half months of incarceration. It is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that since the applicant is a named as well as charge-sheeted accused therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. The occurrence has taken place in the house of the applicant and within seven years of marriage of the applicant. The applicant is husband of the deceased. As such, the burden is upon the applicant not only to explain the manner of occurrence but also his innocence as per Section 106 and 113-B of the Evidence Act. The applicant has miserably failed to discharge the said burden. The deceased was a young lady aged about 24 years whose death has occurred in unnatural circumstances. They therefore contend that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, the learned counsel representing first informant, upon perusal of material brought on record, nature and gravity of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, accusation made and coupled with the fact that prima facie the death of the deceased is a suicidal death, the bona fide of the applicant is explicit from the fact that except for ligature mark, no other external or internal ante-mortem injury was seen on the body of deceased, prima facie the applicant shall not incur life imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC, the occurrence has taken place after expiry of two years and two months from the date of marriage of the applicant, no issue was born to the couple out of the said wedlock, the allegation made in the F.I.R. with regard to commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the deceased for non fulfillment of demand of additional dowry is devoid of material particulars therefore liable to be ignored in view of law laid down by Apex Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & others (supra), there is no material on record to indicate abetment, instigation or conspiracy against applicant or the deceased had committed suicide on account of an immediate act of applicant, the charge-sheet having been filed therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystalized, up to this stage, learned A.G.A. could not point out any such incriminating circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant during the proceeding of trial, the judgement of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs. State of Maharashtra 2023 Live Law (SC) 373 (paragraph 5), the clean antecedents of the applicant and the period of incarceration undergone, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Shivram Verma @ Pankaj Verma, involved in aforesaid case crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under section 229-A I.P.C.
(iii) 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., 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 him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(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 him 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his 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 :- 25.7.2023.
Rks.