Allahabad High Court
Sahib Bansal vs State Of U.P. on 21 November, 2019
Author: Saumitra Dayal Singh
Bench: Saumitra Dayal Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45180 of 2019 Applicant :- Sahib Bansal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Tandon,Dilip Kumar, Sr. Adv.,Rajrshi Gupta,Sanjeev Kumar Tyagi,Vinayak Mithal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Kesari Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Counter and rejoinder affidavits filed today. Taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate with Shri Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Sahib Bansal with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 567 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 307, 120-B, 342 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Pilkhua, District - Hapur, during pendency of trial.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present :
(i) the applicant is accused of demand of dowry, attempt to murder and other offences, punishable with imprisonment upto 10 years. Against the FIR lodged on 22.10.2018, the applicant surrendered on 09.08.2019 and is in confinement since then;
(ii) while the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation, that position has been strongly disputed by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the informant, who submits that not only the applicant failed to comply with the orders passed by this Court and the Supreme Court, he came to surrender four months after expiry of the last date granted by the Supreme Court;
(iii) the applicant has no criminal history;
(iv) the investigation has been concluded; charge sheet submitted and trial commenced. However, it is expected that the proceedings be concluded as expeditiously as possible, without allowing any undue and long adjournment on any count.
(v) on prima facie basis only, it may be noted that, at the core of the dispute between the parties or the real cause for the commission of offence (as the informant would contend), is the matrimonial discord between the applicant and the victim. Inasmuch as, there is no criminal history of the applicant and, at present, the victim is living with her parents. Therefore, in all fairness, the applicant may be enlarged on bail;
(vi) no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State and/or the informant that the applicant, if enlarged on bail would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial.
5. Without expressing any opinion on the final merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of heavier amount and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :
(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial;
(ii) the applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment;
(iii) the applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
6. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.
7. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 21.11.2019 AHA