Geeta Saran v. State of U.P

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44740 of 2023 Applicant :- Geeta Saran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Namdev,Vinod Rajmurti Yadav,Vinod Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1List revised.

¶2Heard Sri Vinod Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶3This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Geeta Saran, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.248 of 2023 under Sections 304-B, 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Katra, District Shahjahanpur.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant states that he has filed supplementary affidavit in the office yesterday i.e. on 18.10.2023 but the same is not on record. He has produced before the Court, a photocopy of the same which is taken on record.

¶5Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record and also make a note in the order sheet regarding the same.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The marriage of the deceased Kavita with Nagendra @ Neeraj, the son of the applicant was solemnized four years back. It is argued that general and omnibus allegations have been made in the FIR against the applicant and his family members. As per postmortem report, the deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging and there was only single ligature mark on the body of the deceased. Nagendra @ Neeraj, the husband of the deceased is in jail. While placing para 22 of the affidavit, it is argued that the applicant is aged about 67 years. It is also pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit and is in jail since 14.6.2023.

¶7Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR. Since the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased, he was the head of the family and was responsible for setting things right, as such prayer for bail be rejected.

¶8After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. General and omnibus allegations have been made in the FIR against the applicant and his family members. The husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶9Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10Let the applicant-Geeta Saran, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) 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.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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.

(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶11The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶12The bail application is allowed. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 19.10.2023 Gaurav Kuls High Court of Judicature at Allahabad