Vivek Chaudhary v. State of U.P

Court No. -64 Case :-CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. -41933 of 2023 Applicant :-Vivek Chaudhary Opposite Party :-State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :-Swetashwa Agarwal,Yash Raj Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :-G.A.,Sharda Prasad Mishra,Subhash Chandra Maurya Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Sharda Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for informant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vivek Chaudhary, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1094 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Tajganj, District-Agra, during pendency of trial. There is allegation in FIR that wife of the applicant, was subjected to offences of cruelty, beating and criminal intimidation on account of demand of dowry by the applicant and other co-accused. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the alleged incident took place on 14.07.2016, but FIR was lodged after delay of almost three months on 04.10.2016. After the marriage of the informant with the applicant on 07.02.2011 till the lodging of FIR, there is no evidence of commission of any offence against her by the applicant and co-accused. He has submitted that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail, but the same got cancelled because the applicant violated the condition of anticipatory bail and left the country without permission of the Court. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that there are other matrimonial disputes pending between the applicant and his wife. She has implicated him in further cases after implication in the present case. Details have been given in the bail application and in supplementary affidavit. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is languishing in jail since 23.08.2023. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and have submitted that there are grave allegations against the applicant of harassment of the informant. They have submitted that the entire family of the applicant has harassed the informant and he has not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond 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 evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 27.10.2023 Abhishek High Court of Judicature at Allahabad