Sunil Kesarwani Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9697 of 2019

Applicant :- Sunil Kesarwani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan,Zia Naz Zaidi

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today annexing certified copy of the ordersheet is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Ms. Zia Naz Zaid, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 340 of 2017, u/s 498-A, 304-B IPC, and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Sarai Inayat, District Allahabad with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.

¶9

This is the second bail application. The first bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 4.5.2018 with the observation that the applicant is husband of the deceased who died within one and half years of the marriage under the unnatural circumstances and no reasonable explanation has coming forth from the side of the applicant as to why the deceased had committed suicide within a very short span of her married life. The second bail application has been filed on the ground that the first bail was rejected on 4.5.2018 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.8.2017, admittedly it is a case of death on account of asphyxia due to hanging and no other ante mortem injury has been found; her hyoid bone has been found intact and therefore, at this stage ground which was taken by the applicant even in the court below that the deceased had committed suicide as she was against the marriage cannot be out-rightly rejected. She has further argued that that first bail was rejected at that stage as noted in the order dated 4.5.2018. The certified copy of the ordersheet reflects that till date only statement of first informant PW-1 has been recorded on 3.1.2020. The applicant is already in jail for about two and half years and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial, therefore the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, he could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶11

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, period of detention and that there is no likelihood of early conclusion of the trial, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Sunil Kesarwani involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

(iii)The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶17

The trial court is hereby directed to expedite and conclude the trial within a period of four months on day to day basis from the date of production of certified copy of the order. In the event the witnesses are not turning up, the trial court shall adopt all coercive steps for securing attendance of the witnesses.

¶18

Order Date :- 20.1.2020 Dhirendra/

Sunil Kesarwani v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kesarwani v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Saroj Vs State of U.P.

Chheddu Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Balram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Kishore Sharma Vs C.B.I.,Acb

Ravi Kumar Alias Sudeep Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.