Shiva Agrahari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10185 of 2023 Applicant :- Shiva Agrahari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Pratap Singh,Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Siddhartha Sinha Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶1Heard Mr. Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-applicant, Mr. A.N. Tiwari, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Siddhartha

Sinha,

learned

counsel

for

the complainant/informant, as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant-Shiva Agrahari for grant of bail in Case Crime No.0475 of 2022, under Sections 120-B, 306 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Gusaiganj, District Sultanpur, during trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the accused-applicant, while pressing the bail application, submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and, he has not committed any offence, as claimed by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the FIR of this case has been lodged by father of the deceased against the applicant and other named accused persons alleging therein that one Priti Agrahari had filed a false case of rape against his son, Vikas Agrahari and in that case Vikas Agrahari was confined in prison and the accused persons were demanding rupees ten lakh in lieu of his release from prison and were also intimidating that if Vikas would not solemnize marriage with Priti, they all would be done to death. Other family members of Priti were also stated to be involved in the conspiracy. It is also the case of the prosecution, as narrated in the FIR, that feeling humiliated/apprehended by the same, the deceased (Ravi Agrahari) has committed suicide on 14.09.2022 at 1.30 hours and has also written a suicide-note.

¶4It is vehemently submitted that the applicant is/was not having any concern with the dispute which was between Priti Agrahari and Vikas Agrahari. In the FIR lodged by Priti against Vikas Agrahari, a copy of which has been placed as Annexure-2 to the bail application and the charge-sheet filed, after investigation, the applicant is not even shown as a witness and, thus, there was neither any occasion nor any opportunity for the applicant to intimidate the deceased or to make demand of rupee ten lakh and, thus, these allegations have been carved out without there being any basis. It is further submitted that even if the suicide-note, allegedly written by the deceased, is believed as it is, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and the role of intimidation has been assigned to co-accused-Pravesh and against him (Pravesh) charge-sheet has not been filed. It is also submitted that death of the deceased appears to have taken place in suspicious circumstances in his own house. In this regard, the attention of this Court has been drawn towards the postmortem report of the deceased wherein apart from a ligature mark found around his neck, a contusion has also been found on right side of his head and it has been vehemently submitted by the learned counsel appearing of the applicant that this injury has not been explained by the prosecution and, it appears that the death of the deceased had occurred otherwise than in circumstances which have been stated in the FIR and the real cause of death has been concealed by the prosecution. It is also submitted that to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC, abetment must be of the magnitude and nature, as defined under Section 107 IPC, and even if the case of the prosecution is admitted to be a case of abetement, the ingredients of abetment, as defined under Section 107 IPC, are patently lacking.

¶5It is next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 15.06.2023. Criminal history of one case has been alleged against the applicant which has been explained in paragraph-31 of the bail application wherein the applicant has been enlarged on bail. Charge sheet in this case has already been filed and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶6Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed a heinous offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶7Learned counsel appearing for the complainant/informant vehemently opposes the bail plea of the applicant on the ground that the applicant was part & parcel of a conspiracy which has hatched to extort money from the deceased and, in this regard intimidation was also given to the deceased and apprehending/humiliating by the same, he has committed suicide. It is also stated that the abetment, as defined under Section 107 IPC, is available in this case and, therefore, having regard to the fact that a young person has committed suicide on account of abetment given by the applicant, the applicant may not be enlarged on bail.

¶8Perusal of record, in the background of submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, would reveal that an FIR was lodged by Priti Agrahari against son of informant of the instant FIR, namely, Vikas Agrahari under the relevant penal provisions, including Section 376 IPC and, after investigation, the charge-sheet was also filed therein. Case of the prosecution is that some amount was being asked by the prosecutrix of that case in connivance with other accused persons and he was also threatened and feeling apprehended and humiliated the deceased has committed suicide. The defence of the applicant appears to be that if Vikas Agrahari was being pressurized/humiliated, there was no occasion for his brother-Ravi Agrahari (deceased) to commit suicide as the occasion and opportunity of committing suicide could only be attributed to Vikas Agrahari. The other defence of the applicant appears to be that the name of the applicant has neither been found in the FIR as a witness nor in the charge-sheet and, therefore, no abetment, as defined under Section 107 IPC, may be attributed to him and even if the suicide-note, allegedly written by the deceased, is believed as it is, the same could only be attributed to co-accused-Pravesh, who allegedly had intimidated the deceased and the charge-sheet has not been filed against him (Pravesh). Admittedly, the death of the deceased has occurred in his house as is evident from the inquest report and apart from a ligature mark, a contusion has also been found on his head and certain question-marks have been placed by the learned counsel for the applicant on the prosecution with regard to not explaining the injury found on the head of the deceased. Disputed questions or contradictory questions of fact may better be left to be appreciated by the trial Court after an opportunity to lead evidence is provided to the parties. However, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, a case for bail appears to have been made out in favour of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 15.06.2023. Criminal history of one case has been adequately explained. Charge sheet in this case has also been filed and the presence of the applicant may be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶9Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.

¶10Let the accused/applicant-Shiva Agrahari, involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶12Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶13Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. . [Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.] Order Date :- 20.11.2023 MVS/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench