Shiv Shankar Sharma v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46519 of 2023 Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwan Ahamad,Rajrshi Gupta,Sr. Advocate,Vijay Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Pandey Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri Rizwan Ahamad and Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶2The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Shiv Shankar Sharma, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 898 of 2022, under Sections-498-A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Tajganj, District-Agra, during pendency of trial.

¶3There are allegations against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the marriage of the couple took place in the year 2021 and incident took place in the year 2022. Initially, the cousin of the deceased, Jeetendra, informed the police at 8:43 am on 13th November, 2022 is that deceased has committed suicide. Thereafter, inquest proceedings were conducted wherein the aforesaid cousin and two uncles of the deceased were present as inquest witnesses. Subsequently, FIR was lodged at about 7:08 pm in the evening implicating the applicant and other co-accused in this case for committing the alleged offences. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the cause of death of deceased was found to be hanging. No other injury was found on body of the deceased. The other co-accused visually father and mother of the applicant have already been enlarged on bail. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 14.11.2022. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has pointed out a pen drive which was produced by investigating officer by the first informant stating that it has not been tampered and it was stated by the informant that prior to date of incident, the deceased has talked on mobile phone with her bhabhi about the harassment being meted out to her on non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. He has submitted that the pen drive is conclusive proof against the applicant that the deceased was subjected to harassment.

¶6After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that the pen drive produced by the informant before investigating officer is not supported by any certificate under Section 65-B of Evidence Act. Moreover, the contents of conversation between the applicant and deceased have not been deciphered by the investigating officer.

¶7Having 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.

¶8In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶9Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 15.12.2023 Abhishek High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad