Akhilesh Kumar Pal v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29597 of 2023 Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Sanjay Kumar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ankit Mishra,Shri Ram Pandey Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ankit Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶2Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶3There is allegation against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife by way of hanging.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and his brother were married two sisters simultaneously. The other sister is residing with his brother at Kolkata. The applicant was living at Kannauj with the deceased where he is serving as a Bank Manager. While he was away to his office the deceased committed suicide by way of hanging. He has submitted that the deceased was pregnant by 8 months and was finding it difficult to live alone. She has sought help from her mother-in-law and also mother to come and live with her but no one came. While the applicant was away to his place of work she committed suicide.

¶5Counsel for the applicant also submitted the she has another sister of the deceased married in the same family. She has neither been named as witness in the charge sheet nor she was examined by the investigating officer to know about the correct facts. The allegation of demand of dowry made against the applicant is unfounded. The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶6On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶7Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping 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., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant, Akhilesh Kumar Pal, involved in Case Crime No. 118 of 2023, under Sections-498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Kotwali Kannauj, District-Kannauj, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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 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.

¶9In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶11Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.

¶12Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days. Order Date :- 7.11.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad