Satyaveer v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12917 of 2023 Applicant :- Satyaveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raghu Raj Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶3The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.267 of 2023, registered under Section 306 I.P.C. at Police Station-Jaswant Nagar, District-Etawah with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶4As per prosecution story, the marriage of brother of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 21.4.2015. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry, thereby had put her to death by hanging her on

14.10.2023.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The FIR is delayed by about eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant is the brother-in-law (Jeth) of the deceased person. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the inquest report of the deceased person conducted on 14.10.2023 itself and the informant herein is the Panch witness no.1 to the said inquest proceedings. Learned counsel has further stated that had the applicant committed the said offence, his name would have been come up at the stage of conducting the inquest proceedings itself.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶7Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶9In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Satyaveer be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii). that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶10It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial. Order Date :- 23.11.2023 Vikas [Krishan Pahal, J.] High Court of Judicature at Allahabad