Gaurav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48580 of 2023 Applicant :- Gaurav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Sunil Kumar Saroj,Vishal Ohri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶2It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is husband of the deceased, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant against the applicant and his other family members with the allegation that on account of non fulfillment of demand of dowry in the form of one lakh rupees case, the applicant and his other family members used to torture and harass the daughter of complainant and on last night all the accused persons murdered her by hanging. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the complainant, his son have repeated the same version of the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits after inquest proceedings, postmortem of the deceased was conducted, wherein except one ligature mark all around the neck, five other injuries in the shape of abrasions and contusions ere found on her person and cause of death was found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem strangulation. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that Niklesh (P.W.1), who is the complainant of the case, in her statement recorded before the court below has stated that the in-laws of her daughter never demanded additional dowry, his daughter was living happily in her matrimonial house and she never made any complaint either against her husband or against her other in-laws, in the evening of

05.04.2022 husband of her daughter called her on mobile phone that her daughter went to the jungle but did not return, thereafter, the complainant along with his son and husband reached the matrimonial house of her daughter and on search dead body of her daughter was found in the jungle and some unknown persons killed her, the in-laws of her daughter are innocent, thus, the complainant has been declared hostile. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that Dileram (P.W.2), who is father of the deceased and Madan Kumar (P.W.3), who is uncle of the deceased in their statements recorded before the court below have also repeated the same version of P.W.1, thus, they also have been declared hostile. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that, thus, there is bleak chance that prosecution may prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the applicant may be convicted. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 07.04.2022, having no criminal history.

¶3Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence, but he has not disputed that complainant and two other witnesses have been declared hostile before the court below.

¶4After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all 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, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶5Let applicant-Gaurav, involved in Case Crime No. 111 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor, be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

(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.

¶6The 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 in accordance with law.

¶7The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 9.11.2023 Mustaqeem. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad